A 

(= 

A 

0 
0 

o 
en 
o 

3J 

0 

33 

8 

O 

7 

> 

1 — 

7 

0 
5 
2 

3D  ■ 

O 

1 

~C 

/ANSWER 


WHIG    MEMBERS 


LEGISLATURE    OF    MASSACHUSETTS./ 


CONSTITUTING 


A  MAJORITY  OF  BOTH  BRANCHES, 


A  I>  D  R  E  8  11$ 


His    Excellency    MARCUS    MORTON, 


DELIVERED   IN   THE 


CONVENTION  OF  THE  TWO  HOUSES, 


J  AN  U  AR  V    22,     1840. 


BOSTON: 

PRINTED    BY     PERKINS    &    MARVIN. 
18  40. 


F 


TO  HIS  EXCELLENCY 


MARCUS     MORTON. 


May  it  please  your  Excellency, 

The  whig  MAJORITY  of  the  LEGISLATURE  of  Massa- 
chusetts, listened  with  regret  and  disappointment  to  your  Excellency's 
Inaugural  Address  to  the  Convention  of  the  two  Houses; — regret,  that 
sentiments  which  had  before  been  used  as  the  mere  stratagems  of  party, 
should  now  be  heard  from  the  Chair  of  State, — and  disappointment, 
that  they  should  have  proceeded  from  one,  whose  dignified  and  impartial 
conduct  in  another  high  office  seemed  a  pledge  of  a  more  independent 
course.  In  reading  the  Address  more  deliberately,  our  regret  in- 
creased, and  our  disappointment  became  surprise,  until,  upon  mature 
reflection,  we  have  felt  it  our  duty  to  make  to  it  a  Public  Answer. 
This  we  should  have  done,  according  to  the  time-honored  custom  of  our 
Fathers,  in  the  name  and  with  the  authority  of  the  Legislature,  but  for 
the  conviction  that  the  Minority,  who  support  your  Excellency  in  the 
two  Branches,  would  have  insisted  upon  a  protracted  debate,  at  great 
expense  to  the  Commonwealth,  but  which  your  Excellency  will  per- 
ceive, by  counting  the  names  subscribed  to  this  Answer,  would  have 
been  wholly  unavailing.  More  desirous  of  saving  the  money  of  the 
people  than  of  talking  long  and  loudly  about  economy,  we  have  readily 
yielded  to  that  consideration  the  advantage  of  giving  to  this  Reply,  in 
form,  the  authority  which  really  belongs  to  it,  as  the  Answer  of  the 
Legislature  to  the  Address  of  the  Executive. 

Your  Excellency  at  the  commencement  of  the  Address,  after 
announcingyourselfasthe  'Supreme  Executive  Magistrate,' — a  title 
which,  though  authorized  by  the  Constitution,  has  heretofore  been 
waived  for  the  more  simple  one  of  '  Chief  Magistrate,' — proceeds  to 
characterize  the  'purpose'  of  those,  by  whose  'unsought  suffrages' 
you  have  at  length  attained  to  that  dignity,  after  having  been  for 
fifteen   years    an   unsuccessful   candidate.      And   this   purpose   your 


Excellency  states  to  have  been  'higher  and  holier'  than  that  of 
'  personal  preference,'  and  by  necessary  inference  higher  and  holier 
than  that  of  your  opponents.  It  might  be  considered  under  any  cir- 
cumstances, a  delicate  task  for  a  Chief  Magistrate  to  institute  such  a 
comparison  between  the  purposes  of  two  portions  of  his  fellow  citizens, 
who  happen  to  be  as  exactly  balanced  as  possible,  short  of  absolute 
equality; — but  the  comparison  seems  peculiarly  unfortunate  in  this 
case,  when  it  is  considered  that  the  result  of  the  late  election  was 
brought  about  by  a  union  of  persons  on  a  single  point,  who  differ 
widely  upon  most  political  questions.  Whether  the  51,034  citizens 
whose  support  was  given  to  your  Excellency  under  such  circumstances, 
were  actuated  by  '  higher  and  holier'  motives  than  the  51,032  who 
cast  their  votes  for  other  candidates,  were  better  left  to  a  higher  than 
human  wisdom. 

Your  Excellency  has  described  this  peculiar  purpose  of  your  own 
supporters,  as  '  the  better  establishment  and  more  perfect  develop- 
ment of  the  democratic  principle.'  If  your  Excellency  means  by  this, 
any  other  democracy  than  that  of  the  Constitution,  particularly  that 
new  democracy  which  evaporates  in  professions  of  regard  for  the 
people,  while  it  is  undermining,  for  selfish  purposes,  the  foundations  of 
the  great  compact  which  alone  protects  popular  rights  from  anarchy, 
we  shall  not  dispute  with  your  Excellency's  party  their  exclusive 
claim  to  its  honors  and  its  profits.  But  if  your  Excellency  means  the 
true  democracy  of  the  Constitution,  it  will  probably  be  new  informa- 
tion to  the  people  of  this  Commonwealth,  that  the  elevation  of  your  Ex- 
cellency, by  a  bare  majority  of  votes,  aided  by  an  unfortunate  division 
among  your  opponents,  manifests  any  new  desire  for  its  '  better  estab- 
lishment or  more  perfect  development.'  It  had  been  until  now  be- 
lieved, that  the  true  democratic  principle  was  sufficiently  defined  and 
guarded  in  the  Constitution  and  Bill  of  Rights  of  Massachusetts  ;  and 
it  was  left  to  your  Excellency,  and  your  political  advisers,  to  discover 
that  such  a  fortuitous  election  could  impart  to  that  principle  new 
vigor,  or  greater  security.  It  would  be  a  melancholy  indication  of 
the  instability  of  our  institutions,  if,  after  sixty  years'  experience  of 
the  blessings  of  liberty,  equality,  and  prosperity,  which  we  have  so 
eminently  enjoyed,  and  which  we  have  attributed  to  a  Constitution, 
supposed  to  contain  within  itself  the  true  principle  and  sufficient  de- 
fences of  democratic  liberty,  we  are  now  to  learn,  that  their  establish- 
ment and  development  depend  upon  the  individual,  whom  the  temper  of 
the  times,  or  the  mutations  of  public  opinion  upon  temporary  topics, 
may  have  placed  in  the  chair. 

If  your  Excellency  had  described  *  the  democratic  principle '  of 
which  you  have  been  thus  thought  '  worthy  to  be  the  representative,' 
as  consisting  in  any  peculiar  views  of  civil  polity,  or  opinions  on  the 


leading  topics  of  the  day,  the  comparison  drawn  between  '  the  higher 
and  holier  purpose'  of  your  supporters,  and  that  of  your  opponents, 
would  have  been  less  offensive.  But  your  Excellency  has,  in  the  Ad- 
dress, placed  yourself  before  the  people  as  having  been  adjudged  by 
their  votes  the  more  worthy  representative  of  all  the  acknowledged 
principles  of  civil  liberty,  founded  upon  all  the  Christian  virtues, — of 
'  a  principle  founded  in  humanity,  guided  by  benevolence,  and  look- 
ing to  the  ever  progressing  improvement  and  happiness  of  the  whole 
human  family — which  ever  seeks  to  protect  the  weak,  to  elevate  the 
depressed,  and  to  secure  the  just  and  equal  rights  of  all, — a  principle 
which  is  in  harmony  with  pure  religion,  that  establishes  the  love  of 
God  as  the  first  law  of  morality, — a  principle  which,  by  listening  to 
the  voice  of  reason  as  it  breathes  through  the  people,  bows  reverently 
before  the  dictates  of  justice,  while  it  spurns  at  the  despotism  of  man, 
—  a  principle  which  gives  the  highest  security  to  property,  by  giving 
security  also  to  labor  in  the  enjoyment  of  the  fruits  of  its  own  indus- 
try,— a  principle  which  is  free  from  envy  and  narrow  jealousy,  and 
cheerfully  acknowledges  the  benefits  of  cultivated  intelligence,  and  of 
experience,  while  it  respects,  as  the  paramount  fountain  of  freedom  and 
order,  the  collective  will  that  includes  all  the  intelligence  of  the  com- 
munity— the  will  of  the  people.'  This  is  the  '  principle '  assumed 
by  your  Excellency  as  the  standard  and  criterion  by  which  you  have 
been  successfully  compared  with  your  '  distinguished  predecessor,' 
and  these  are  the  peculiar  civil  and  Christian  graces  that  separate 
your  Excellency's  supporters  from  those  who  have  shown  a  disregard 
of  them  by  voting  for  other  candidates.  It  will  be  indeed  fortunate 
for  the  people,  if  their  '  Supreme  Executive  Magistrate'  shall  justify 
a  choice  made  upon  such  principles,  by  an  administration  of  corres- 
ponding excellence ;  but  we  cannot  think  it  a  happy  augury  of  its 
success,  that  those  advisers,  to  whose  more  perfect  acquaintance  with 
the  exigencies  of  the  party  your  Excellency  must  in  this  particular 
have  yielded  your  own  better  sense  of  propriety,  should  have  judged  it 
necessary  thus  to  begin  by  flattering  one-half  of  your  fellow  citizens  at 
the  expense  of  the  other. 

Your  Excellency  proceeds  to  the  discussion  of  some  of  the  most 
important  political  questions  of  the  day,  commencing  with  the  Cur- 
rency ;  and  your  Excellency  remarks  that, — '  there  is  no  branch  of 
the  sovereign  power  more  important  or  more  difficult  to  be  exercised 
than  the  regulation  of  the  currency  ; '  that  '  it  extends  to  all  the 
relations  of  life,  and  reaches  the  personal  interest  of  every  man 
in  the  community  ;  '  '  and  that  the  great  and  leading  object  of 
Government  should  be,  to  establish  and  maintain  a  uniform  and 
unchangeable  measure  of  value.'  To  these  sound  and  seasonable 
opinions   we  entirely     ssent ;   and  if  there   ever   was  a  country   so 


extensive  as  ours,  where,  under  popular  institutions,  a  more  uniform 
measure  of  value  prevailed  than  in  the  United  States,  when  President 
Jackson  hegan  to  deveiope  his  financial  policy,  it  has  escaped  our 
knowledge.  We  possessed  then  a  convertible  paper,  with  which  a 
man  might  travel  from  Maine  to  Louisiana  ;  and  the  rate  of  exchange 
between  the  very  remotest  extremities  of  the  country  rarely  exceeded 
one  per  cent.  Let  this  state  of  things  be  compared  by  any  practical 
man  with  that  now  existing,  after  the  promises  of  the  National 
Administration  for  six  years  past  to  give  the  country  '  a  better  cur- 
rency.' Let  him  consider,  that  under  the  operation  of  that  policy, 
the  exchange  between  distant  parts  of  the  Union  has  become  so 
enormous,  as  to  cut  off  almost  all  business  between  them  which 
requires  the  transmission  of  funds — thus  striking  a  deadly  blow  at 
the  great  interest  of  manufactures,  and  seriously  impairing  those  of 
commerce  and  agriculture  within  the  Commonwealth.  For  every 
dollar  that  was  paid  by  the  manufacturer  in  Massachusetts,  to  get 
home  the  proceeds  of  his  sales  in  the  great  market  of  the  South 
and  West,  while  the  United  States'  Bank  was  in  operation  and  held 
the  public  deposites,  he  pays  now  from  five  to  twenty-five  times  as 
much,  if  he  attempts  to  sell  at  all  against  such  a  ruinous  discount. 
This  effect  began  from  the  moment  that  the  Bank  of  the  U.  S.  was  de- 
prived by  Gen.  Jackson  of  the  power  of  regulating  the  currency  and 
exchanges  of  the  country  ;  and  it  has  gone  on  from  bad  to  worse,  under 
the  miserable,  imbecile  administration  of  those  who,  in  succeeding  to 
his  power,  seem  only  to  have  inherited  his  capacity  for  mischief 

Most  heartily  do  we  agree  with  your  Excellency,  '  that  the  great 
and  leading  object  of  Government  should  be  to  establish  a  uniform 
and  unchangeable  measure  of  value.'  We  rejoice  that  your  Excellency, 
disdaining  the  feeble  subterfuge  of  the  dominant  party  at  Washington, 
admits  that  it  is  the  duty  of  Government  to  regulate  the  currency, — 
and  we  should  have  rejoiced  still  more,  had  your  Excellency  followed 
up  the  admission  with  the  proper  censure  of  that  party,  for  so  grossly 
neglecting  its  duty  and  denying  its  power.  We  should  have  expected, 
from  one  holding  upon  this  point  so  sound  a  theory,  the  most  indignant 
denunciation,  instead  of  the  most  obsequious  approval,  of  the  policy  of 
the  National  Administration  upon  this  subject — a  policy  founded  in 
the  assumption,  that  the  regulation  of  the  currency  is  not  within  the 
province  of  the  General  Government.  This  is  the  new  doctrine  of  the 
party  upon  this  subject.  When  the  deposits  were  removed  from  the 
United  States'  Bank,  where  they  had  been  the  efficient  instrument  of 
that  regulation,  it  was  not  on  the  ground  that  the  General  Government 
had  no  power  or  right  over  the  subject,  but  that  the  State  Banks,  if 
made  the  depositaries  of  the  public  funds,  would  furnish  the  country 
'  a  better  currency.'      It  was  only  when  this  system  exploded,    and 


scattered  dismay  and  ruin  through  the  land — when,  by  the  failure  of 
the  Pet  Banks,  (whose  irresponsible  officers  had  been  tempted  first  to 
speculation,  and  then  to  plunder,  by  the  possession  of  the  public  moneys,) 
widows  and  orphans  and  public  charities  saw  their  property  swept 
into  the  gulf  of  party  profligacy — when  the  hard  working  fisherman, 
and  the  worn  out  pensioner,  had  received,  the  one  his  bounty,  and 
the  other  his  annual  stipend,  in  the  worthless  rags  of  these  first 
Independent  Treasuries, — then  it  was,  that  the  new  doctrine  was  put 
forth,  that  the  Government  had  no  right  nor  power  to  regulate  the 
currency,  and  that  its  action  was  limited  to  provision  for  the  safe 
keeping  of  the  public  funds.  Against  this  new  doctrine,  we  most 
earnestly  remonstrate.     It  has  no  foundation  in  the  Constitution. 

We  agree  with  your   Excellency,   that    'twenty-six  Sovereignties, 
acting   independently  of  each   other,  under  very  little  restraint  from 
the  common  Government,  and  influenced  by  different   interests  and 
circumstances,'   can  hardly  be  expected   on  this  subject  '  to  act  with 
unity  of  purpose,  and  harmony  of  measures,'  and  that  '  these  com- 
plicated    difficulties     were    understood    and    fully    appreciated,    by 
the     patriotic     statesmen     who     formed     our    federal     constitution,' 
and    that    '  they    supposed    that    they    had    invested    the    General 
Government  with  all  the  necessary  authority  to  the  proper    admin- 
istration  of  this    branch  of  sovereign  power;' — and  mainly  do  we 
agree   with    your    Excellency,   when  we   consider  the  course  of  the 
General  Government  for  the  last  six  years,  that  '  in  the  practical  con- 
struction and   operation  of  these  provisions,  all   the   benefits   which 
were  expected  from  them   have  not  been  realised ;'   but  we   probably 
differ  from  your  Excellency  in  the  conviction,  that  these  provisions  of 
the  Constitution  have  failed   to  produce  those  benefits,  only  because 
the  General  Government,  supported  by  the  (self  styled)  Democratic 
party,  have  wilfully  neglected  to  make   use  of  them.     The  '  practical 
construction'  of  these  provisions  by  the  Administration  is,  that  they 
were  adopted   and   ordained   by  the  people,  only  that  they  might   be 
neglected  and  repudiated  by  the  Government.     And  in  the  opinion  of 
the    Majority  of  the   Legislature   of    Massachusetts,    never    did    the 
Government  of  a  free  people  more  grossly   betray  their  trust,  than  in 
this  refusal  even  to  attempt  to  discharge  this  great  duty  to  the  country. 
Denying  as  well  as  neglecting  it,  a  plan  for  the  mere  custody  of  the 
public  funds  is  now  again  proposed  to  Congress,  under  the  name  of 
the  Independent  Treasury  ;  and  if  any  thing  were  needed  to  show  the 
total  inappropriateness  of  the  description  of   '  the  democratic  prin- 
ciple,'   in  the  opening  of  the  Address,   as  the  distinguishing  test  of 
your   Excellency's  party,    it  would  be   the  striking   fact,  that  on  this 
most  important  measure,  that  party  has  within  the  last  five  years  enter- 
tained opinions,  and  pursued  a  course,  diametrically  opposite.     The 


8 

Sub-treasury,  or  Independent  Treasury,  when  proposed  in  Congress 
a  few  years  ago  by  a  Southern  States'  rights  member,  was  unanimously 
opposed  by  the  friends  of  President  Jaclison,  and  denounced  in 
unsparing  terms  by  the  accredited  organ  of  his  sentiments.  '  The 
principles  of  pure  religion,  of  humanity,  and  benevolence,'  are  the 
same  now  that  they  were  then ;  but  the  stability  of  these  principles 
has  not  preserved  the  party,  to  whom  your  Excellency  attributes  a 
monopoly  of  them,  from  a  total  revolution  in  their  opinions. 

Your  Excellency  speaks  of  the  system  of  the  Independent  Treasury 
with  approbation,  as  likely  to  be  beneficial  to  American  manufactures, 
and  even  as  having  a  tendency,  in  connection  with  the  suppression  of 
small  bank  bills,,  'to  found  their  prosperity  upon  a  rock.'  The  Majority 
of  the  Legislature  are  ignorant  by  what  possible  operation  this  effect 
is  to  be  produced.  This  system  is  a  mere  fiscal  device,  which  in 
substance  provides  that  the  revenue  shall  be  collected  in  specie  funds, 
and  kept  in  the  iron  chests  and  brick  vaults  of  certain  officers,  till 
drawn  out  by  warrants  from  the  Treasury,  in  payment  of  public  dues. 
As  a  measure  for  multiplying  government  patronage,  as  creating 
temptations  to  fraud,  and  withdrawing  a  part  of  the  money  of  the 
country — greater  or  less  according  to  circumstances — from  the  chan- 
nels of  trade,  it  is  obviously  mischievous.  And  it  would  have  been 
very  instructive  to  have  been  informed  by  your  Excellency,  how  this 
system,  which  appears  to  us  to  be  a  mere  hoarding  of  the  precious 
metals,  where  they  can  be  of  no  use  to  any  one  but  the  absconding 
defaulter,  is  to  help  'to  found  our  manufactures  on  a  rock.'  The 
obvious  and  the  only  important  effect  of  it  is,  to  give  to  the  Govern- 
ment, or  rather  to  the  receiving  officers  of  the  Government,  the  actual 
possession  of  a  large  portion  of  the  specie  of  the  country.  So  long  as 
they  keep  it,  the  system  simply  withdraws  so  much  money  from  circu- 
lation ;  and  when  it  is  paid  out  by  the  disbursing  officers,  the  system 
ceases  to  operate  upon  it.  It  is  precisely,  on  a  large  scale,  that  vice 
of  hoarding,  which  all  political  economists  have  pointed  out  as 
enfeebling  a  country  when  practised  by  individuals.  For  every  dollar 
thus  locked  up  by  the  Government,  much  more  than  an  equal  amount 
of  active  capital  is  withdrawn  from  commerce  and  manufactures,  as 
every  dollar  in  specie  may  safely  maintain  more  than  an  equal  amount 
of  credit.  How  this  withdrawal  of  money  from  circulation — this  con- 
traction of  the  basis  of  credit — this  actual  diminution  of  the  capital  of 
the  country,  is  to  '  found  the  manufactures  of  Massachusetts  on  a 
rock,'  the  Majority  of  the  Legislature  is  at  a  loss  to  understand.  To 
them  they  seem  to  be  words  without  meaning. — But  that  the  *  system' 
will  not  be  without  its  effect  upon  the  business  and  politics  of  the 
country,  the  Majority  will  readily  admit.  The  possession  of  such  a 
considerable  amount  of  the  specie  capital   of  the  country,  which  the 


President  states,  in  his  last  Message  to  Congress,  will  amount  in  the 
hands  of  the  Collector  of  New  York  alone  to  an  average  of  $500,000 
at  a  time,  and  will  be  often  over  a  million,  will,  besides  the  enormous 
temptation  to  plunder,  give  to  the  Government  the  most  dangerous 
power  of  disturbing  the  money  market,  though  not  the  salutary  power 
of  regulating  the  currency — the  power  of  oppressing  particular  Banks, 
though  not  of  controlling  the  whole — the  power  of  creating  a  panic, 
without  that  of  restoring  confidence.  It  will  hang  like  a  cloud  in  the 
atmosphere,  to  be  directed  by  Executive  favor  or  vengeance,  formi- 
dable from  the  uncertainty  where  it  may  fall — an  engine  of  oppression 
and  corruption,  operating  upon  the  fears  of  the  community  and  the 
cupidity  of  partisans.  Whether  its  favors  or  its  frowns  are  to  be  felt 
by  the  manufacturers  of  Massachusetts,  is  to  depend,  we  presume,  upon 
the  strength  of  their  adhesion  to  the  new   '  democratic  principle.' 

The  Majority  of  the  Legislature  can  see  nothing  in  this  system  but 
ignorance  of  the  first  principles  of  political  economy,  or  a  wilful  con- 
version of  the  public  funds  into  an  instrument  of  coercion  and  corrup- 
tion for  party  purposes.  And  what  can  possibly  be  the  '  view,'  in 
which  your  Excellency  '  regards  it  as  fraught  with  benefits  to  the 
whole  Union,  but  most  of  all  to  Massachusetts,'  it  is  believed  that  the 
most  diligent  reader  of  the  Address  will  be  wholly  unable  to  conjecture. 
The  only  reasons  apparently  given  by  your  Excellency  for  this  opinion, 
are,  that  '  a  moderate  revenue,  steady  prices,  cash  duties,  these  are  the 
true  safeguards  to  domestic  industry,' — but  what  agency  the  locking 
up  the  revenue  in  specie  in  iron  chests  and  brick  vaults,  instead  of 
depositing  it  with  responsible  Banks,  will  have  in  moderating  the 
revenue,  unless  it  be  by  exposing  it  to  be  more  readily  carried  off  by 
defaulters,  is  not  very  obvious.  The  subject  of  cash  duties  is  not 
mentioned  in  the  Sub-treasury  bill.  It  is  a  system  totally  independent 
of  and  unconnected  with  this  or  any  other  mode  of  keeping  the  public 
fugds  ;  and  that  this  mode  is  to  insure  '  steady  prices,'  seems  to  us  a 
matter  whose  novelty  and  importance,  if  there  be  any  pretence  ot 
truth  in  it,  would  have  justified  some  effort  on  the  part  of  your  Excel- 
lency to  make  it  intelligible  to  others. — That  the  system  will  operate 
to  reduce  the  rate  of  wages  of  the  laboring  classes,  has  been  loudly 
insisted  upon  by  your  Excellency's  friends  at  Washington,  as  one 
of  its  signal  advantages.  We  do  not  observe  that  your  Excellency 
enumerates  this  as  one  of  the  modes  in  which  it  will  help  to  '  found  the 
manufactures  of  Massachusetts  upon  a  rock,'  though  obviously,  of  all 
its  supposed  effects,  this  seems  most  likely  to  benefit  the  manufacturer. 
If  this  is  the  '  view'  in  which  it  appears  to  your  Excellency  so  '  fraught 
with  benefits  to  Massachusetts,  whatever  of  soundness  there  may  be  in 
that  opinion,  it  only  shows  how  little  the  system  deserves  the  name  of 
a  Democratic  measure. 
2 


10 

Your  Excellency  passes  from  the  subject  of  the  Currency  to  that  of 
the  Banks,  and  discusses  at  length  the  imperfections  of  the  Banking 
System  of  the  Commonwealth.  There  are  undoubtedly  great  im- 
perfections and  liabilities  to  abuse  in  the  system,  and  it  would  gratify 
us  to  believe  that  any  substitute  for  it  will  be  found  more  free  from 
objection.  '  Under  the  operation  of  this  system,  however/  as  your 
Excellency  observes,  '  and  notwithstanding  its  evils,  we  have  grown 
m  wealth,  and  have  enjoyed  an  extraordinary  degree  of  prosperity.' 
On  the  other  hand,  the  measures  proposed  elsewhere,  for  a  change  in 
the  existing  system,  have  proved  utterly  abortive,  commencing  with 
that  which,  under  the  name  of  the  Safety  Fund,  was  introduced  into 
New  York  by  Mr.  Van  Buren  while  Governor  of  that  State,  and 
ending  with  the  present  General  Banking  Law  of  the  same  State, 
which  seems  to  be  decidedly  disapproved  by  your  Excellency.  Mean- 
time the  Banks  of  Massachusetts,  in  the  recent  financial  crisis,  stood 
firm,  and  have  preserved  to  this  Commonwealth  and  all  New  England, 
a  sound  convertible  currency.  Whatever  be  the  general  objections 
to  our  Banking  system,  and  we  do  not  deny  their  existence,  it  appears 
to  us  expedient  '  to  postpone  any  fundamental  action  on  the  subject,' 
not  as  your  Excellency  recommends,  '  until  the  measures  of  the  General 
Government  with  regard  to  the  collection  and  disbursement  of  the 
national  revenue  shall  be  definitely  settled,'  for  from  these,  no  rational 
man  can  hope  for  any  relief;  but  until  some  practical  improvement  in 
our  own  system  is  suggested.  That  has  not  yet  been  done.  We 
anxiously  but  vainly  hoped  to  have  found  it  in  your  Excellency's 
Address,  as  the  sequel  of  so  much  complaint  of  the  existing  state 
of  things.  Your  Excellency  does  not  venture  to  recommend  the  hard 
money  system,  the  favorite  topic  of  party  declamation,  but  advises  the 
Legislature  to  leave  the  Banking  system  to  '  private  responsibility  and 
enterprise,'  and  to  let  the  Banks  '  spring  up  under  the  action  of 
o-eneral  laws,'  and  'not  to  share  the  responsibility  of  creating  them,' 
— thereby  meaning,  vve  presume,  to  recommend,  as  the  panacea  for 
the  evils  of  the  present  system,  an  unrestrained  liberty  to  all  to  issue 
their  notes  as  currency.  We  need  not  inform  your  Excellency  that 
this  principle  was  long  ago  found  so  mischievous  in  practice  as  to 
have  been  specially  prohibited  by  law,  and  we  should  have  doubted 
whether  such  could  possibly  be  your  Excellency's  meaning,  could 
we  have  interpreted  your  Excellency's  language  otherwise.  We 
apprehend  that  this  recommendation  has  been  read  with  astonishment 
by  persons  of  all  parties.  That  the  circulation  of  the  notes  of  in- 
dividuals as  currency,  would  be  the  necessary  effect  of  an  attempt  to 
establish  the  hard  money  system,  was  once  demonstrated  by  a  dis- 
tinguished statesman  of  Massachusetts,  as  one  of  its  most  deplorable 
consequences  ; — and  the  '  experiment '  of  supplying  the  place  of  the  con- 


11 

vertible  bills  of  Banks,  incorporated  and  controlled  by  the  Legislature, 
with  the  notes  of  every  individual  or  voluntary  partnership  who  should 
choose  to  issue  a  currency  of  their  own,  must  convince  all  sober 
minded  persons  how  much  easier  it  is  to  point  out  the  evils  of  the 
existing  system  than  to  amend  them.  So  much  denunciation,  followed 
up  by  the  proposition  of  such  a  remedy  only,  is  far  better  adapted  to 
foment  popular  discontent,  than  to  improve  the  condition  of  the  currency. 

With  regard  to  the  '  character  of  monopoly,'  which  your  Excellency 
considers  the  chief  vice  of  the  Banking  system,  your  Excellency 
observes,  that  'the  profusion  with  which  Bank  Charters  have  been 
lavished,  has  at  least  taken  from  them  any  special  value  ;  nor  is  it 
believed  that  the  regulation  of  the  Banking  system  by  a  general 
law,  would  create  any  large  accession  of  competitors  to  the  existing 
Banks.'  It  appears  to  us  to  be  at  the  best  but  an  unprofitable  employ- 
ment of  time,  for  practical  statesmen  to  argue  elaborately  against  a 
monopoly,  as  '  a  radical  infirmity,'  and  an  '  essential  vice,'  of  the 
Banking  system,  while  it  is  admitted  that  such  monopoly  confers  no 
'special  value,'  and  while  no  '  large  increase  of  competitors'  would 
take  place  by  its  suppression;  circumstances  which  show  clearly  that 
this  is  not  the  cause  of  any  defective  operation  of  the  system.  Besides 
which  it  is  obvious,  that  the  unrestrained  liberty  of  Banking  by  in- 
dividuals and  unincorporated  partnerships,  is  the  only  possible  remedy 
for  this  imputed  '  vice'  of  monopoly  ; — a  remedy  which,  as  has  already 
been  intimated,  has  heretofore  been  found  worse  than  the  disease.  We 
are  aware  that  the  cry  of '  monopoly,'  is  believed  by  your  Excellency's 
supporters  to  be  a  very  efficient  watch-word  of  party ;  but  appeals  of 
this  kind,  while  they  fill  the  ears  of  the  community  at  first  with  odious 
and  alarming  sounds,  cannot  be  supposed  to  continue  long  to  operate 
upon  their  fears,  when  accompanied  with  such  an  admission  of  the 
utter  futility  of  the  complaint. 

Without  undertaking  the  defence  of  the  Banks,  we  will  dismiss 
this  part  of  the  Address  with  a  single  practical  view  of  its  bear- 
ing on  the  aflfairs  of  this  Commonwealth.  If  the  exclusive  privi- 
lege of  issuing  redeemable  paper  now  possessed  by  the  Banks  were 
taken  away,  the  Bank  Tax  must  of  course  cease  to  be  levied,  not 
merely  because  it  would  be  unjust  to  levy  it  after  the  only  con- 
sideration for  it  is  withdrawn,  but  because  no  banking  company 
would  find  it  for  its  interest  to  continue  to  pay  it.  The  Bank 
Tax  is  the  source  from  which  seven-eighths  of  the  revenue  of  the 
State  are  derived.  All  its  other  regular  sources  of  income  would  not 
defray  one-half  of  the  annual  charge  of  the  House  of  Representatives. 
There  is  no  substitute  known  for  it  but  direct  taxation  ;  so  that  your 
Excellency's  proposal  to  remove  the  character  of  monopoly  from  the 
Banks,  is  practically  a  proposal  to  repeal  the  Bank  Tax,  and  to  levy  a 


12 

Direct  Tax  of  at  least  §340,000  a  year,  besides  subjecting  the  State  to 
all  the  evils  of  an  unregulated  and  irredeemable  paper  currency. 

Whatever  may  be  the  disorders  in  our  Banking  System,  these  have 
chiefly  disclosed  themselves  since  the  commencement  of  the  '  experi- 
ments'  of  the  General  Government  upon  the  currency.  When  imme- 
diately following  a  session  of  Congress,  in  which  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives, by  a  vote  of  about  two  to  one,  resolved,  that  the  public  funds 
were  safe  in  the  custody  of  the  Bank  which  Congress  had  chartered, 
(and  which  must  be  carefully  distinguished  from  that  which  the  State 
of  Pennsylvania  afterwards  created  under  the  same  name,)  the  Presi- 
dent of  the  United  States,  by  promoting  one  Secretary  of  the  Treasury, 
and  displacing  a  second,  had  succeeded  in  finding  a  third  pliant 
enough  to  obey  the  Executive  mandate  and  order  the  removal  of  the 
deposits, — Banks  in  the  several  States  were  selected  to  receive  them, 
not  because  they  were  the  soundest,  but  upon  the  avowed  ground  that 
their  Directors  were  favorable  to  the  National  Administration.  This 
shower  of  public  money  upon  the  local  Banks,  administered  by  politi- 
cal favorites,  stimulated  into  existence  that  '  wild  and  reckless  spirit 
of  speculation,'  to  which  your  Excellency  attributes  the  pecuniary 
embarrassments  of  the  community,  by  giving  birth  at  once  to  an 
enormous  issue  of  paper,  which  was  loaned  out  in  most  extravagant 
sums  to  the  partisans  of  government,  often  without  any  security,  and 
to  be  employed  in  the  wildest  schemes  of  speculation.  A  sudden  and 
general  inflation  of  the  currency  thus  took  place,  and  when  Congress, 
perceiving  that  the  surplus  revenue  was  rapidly  assuming  the  form  of 
a  vast  electioneering  fund,  ordered  its  distribution  among  the  States, 
many  of  these  institutions  found  it  impossible  to  restore  the  sums  con- 
fided to  them,  and  after  an  ineffectual  struggle  of  a  few  months,  a  gen- 
eral explosion  took  place.  In  our  own  State,  the  Commonwealth  Bank, 
the  Franklin  and  La  Fayette  Banks,  totally  failed,  and  other  deposit 
Banks  found  their  capital  seriously  impaired.  A  contraction  of  the 
circulation  was  necessarily  made,  as  suddenly  as  it  had  been  enlarged, 
the  whole  currency  of  the  Nation  was  thrown  into  disorder,  and  a  gen- 
eral bankruptcy  threatened  the  country.  The  community  is  now 
slowly  recovering  from  the  unnatural  condition  into  which  it  was 
thrown  by  this  grand  experiment. 

Your  Excellency  next  animadverts  upon  the  subject  of  Special 
Legislation,  and  inculcates  the  doctrine  that  '  it  should  be  our  chief 
duty  to  make  laws  for  the  betiefit  of  the  whole,'  a  duty  represented  by 
your  Excellency  to  have  been  so  flagrantly  violated  by  former  Legisla- 
tures, that  out  of  nine  hundred  acts  passed  in  the  last  four  years,  seven 
hundred  are  Special,  and  two  hundred  only  are  General  Laws.  If  by 
limiting  your  Excellency's  censure  of  past  legislation  to  the  last  four 
years,  it  is  intended  that  the  proceedings  of  these  years  are  eminently 


1  c^ 

obnoxious  to  the  charge  of  multiplying  special  laws,  we  believe  the 
reproof  to  be  misapplied.  We  find  that  in  the  eighteen  legislative 
days,  in  which  your  Excellency  filled  the  Executive  chair,  after  the 
decease  of  Gov.  Eustis,  one  hundred  and  two  laws  were  passed.  Of 
these,  twenty  eight  were  general  laws,  and  seventy  four  were  special ; 
and  of  the  seventy  four  private  acts,  nine  were  for  the  creation  of  new 
Banks,  of  which  the  unfortunate  Banks  of  Belchertown  and  Sunderland 
were  two. — If  by  a  special  law,  were  understood  a  law  to  favor  an 
individual,  or  a  body  of  men,  which  would  not  have  been  granted 
under  like  circumstances  to  any  other  individual  or  body,  it  is  not 
merely  ill  advised  legislation,  but  high  handed  tyranny.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  is  for  the  interest  of  the  whole  people,  that  any  individual 
should,  when  a  case  arises  requiring  it,  receive  that  parental  assistance 
from  legislation,  which  legislation  alone  can  afford.  Provided  the 
rights  of  others  are  not  invaded  by  it,  it  is  difficult  to  perceive  any 
sound  objection  to  Acts  for  the  relief  of  individuals  under  peculiar 
circumstances,  to  which  the  general  laws  are  inapplicable.  Out  of 
the  seven  hundred  Private  Acts,  held  up  by  your  Excellency  to  public 
odium,  not  one  is  referred  to  as  granting  privileges  to  any  individual 
or  body,  which  would  not  alike  have  been  granted  to  all ;  and  their 
general  beneficent  character  could  not  be  better  described,  than  by 
comparing  them,  in  your  Excellency's  language,  to  '  the  light  and  air 
and  dews  of  heaven,  which  fall  equally  on  all.' 

Of  the  Special  Acts,  those  establishing  Corporations  appear  to 
meet  your  Excellency's  most  decided  disapprobation.  The  Address 
states,  that  '  one  of  the  vices  of  the  present  age,  stimulated  by  ex- 
travagance, and  a  thirst  to  acquire  property  without  earning  it,  is  a 
desire  to  transact  ordinary  business  by  means  of  charters  of  incorpora- 
tion.' The  Majority  would  be  glad  to  think,  that  the  vices  of  the 
age  were  of.no  more  aggravated  character  than  that  of  a  desire  to  be 
incorporated  'to  transact  ordinary  business.'  But  as  your  Excellency 
speaks  with  so  much  disapprobation  of  the  '  perpetuity '  that  attends 
these  Corporations,  and  particularly  of  the  various  evils  that  grow 
out  of  their  power  of  holding  real  estate,  and  among  them,  that 
wives  are  deprived  of  dower,  that  the  publicity  of  record  is  avoided, 
and  a  species  of  mortmain  created  by  such  charters, — we  have  exam- 
ined the  Special  Acts  passed  during  your  Excellency's  former  brief 
administration,  and  find  to  our  surprise,  that  among  them,  a  grant, 
of  perhaps  the  most  unlimited  power  ever  given  in  this  Common- 
wealth, to  a  Corporation  to  hold  real  estate,  and  that  forever,  and 
without  any  power  in  the  Legislature  to  repeal  it,  was  sanctioned  by 
your  Excellency.  The  Act  to  incorporate  the  Proprietors  of  the  City 
Hotel  in  Boston,  enables  the  Corporation  to  purchase  and  hold  'any 
pieces  or  parcels  of  land   adjoining  each  other  within  the  City   of 


14 

Boston,  and  thereon  to  erect  a  building  or  buildings  to  be  used  and  im- 
proved as  a  Public  Hotel,  and  such  halls  and  other  buildings  for  public 
use  and  accommodation  as  the  said  Corporation  may  deem  expedient.' 
The  value  of  the  land  and  buildings  was  not  to  exceed  half  a  million 
OF  DOLLARS,  and  at  the  expiration  of  twenty  years,  the  real  estate  was 
to  be  vested  in  the  Corporators  individually,  as  tenants  in  common  ; 
thus  virtually  limiting  the  existence  of  the  Corporation  to  that  period. 
This  Act  was  approved  by  your  Excellency  Feb.  24,  1825.  Two  days 
after,  your  Excellency  approved  an  additional  Act,  in  four  lines,  of 
which  the  only  provision  was,  to  repeal  this  limitation  of  time,  and 
thus  render  the  Corporation,  and  its  '  mortmain'  of  half  a  million  of  real 
estate,  perpetual,  and  place  it  beyond  the  reach  of  any  future  interfer- 
ence by  the  Legislature.  Instructed  by  such  examples,  a  law  was  passed 
under  one  of  your  '  distinguished  predecessors,'  to  prevent  such  im- 
provident legislation,  by  reserving  a  general  power  to  the  Legislature  to 
modify  or  repeal  all  charters  thereafter  granted  for  an  indefinite  duration. 
Besides  the  'parochial,  literary,  benevolent,  and  charitable  incor- 
porations,' which  are  fortunate  enough  to  escape  your  Excellency's 
condemnation,  by  far  the  greater  part  of  these  charters  are  for 
manufacturing  or  banking  corporations ;  and  that  these  are  pro- 
ductive in  any  serious  degree  of  the  evils  imputed  to  them,  of  '  inju- 
riously affecting  the  matrimonial  relation,  depriving  the  wife  of  her 
dower ' — '  affecting  the  modes  of  conveyance ' — '  avoiding  the  publicity 
of  the  County  Registry' — 'diminishing  the  liability  of  the  partners 
for  the  debts  of  the  Company  ' — '  creating  mortmain  ' — '  promoting 
entails' — '  and  preventing  an  equal  distribution  of  property,' — the  Ma- 
jority of  the  Legislature  cannot  bring  themselves  to  apprehend.  The  right 
of  dower  of  the  Corporator's  wife  is  not  affected,  because,  though  the 
Corporation  may  hold  real  estate,  not  subject  to  dower,  it  is  purchased 
with  the  personal  property  of  the  stockholder,  in  which  his  wife  would 
have  had  no  right  of  dower.  The  publicity  of  the  County  Registry  is 
not  affected,  because  all  conveyances  of  real  estate  to  or  from  a  Cor- 
poration, must  be  recorded  there  like  other  deeds.  They  do  not 
diminish  the  liability  of  the  partners  for  the  debts  of  the  Company, 
because  the  amount  of  stock  put  in  by  each  stockholder  is  liable  for 
the  debts  of  the  Company,  as  much  as  in  the  case  of  limited  copart- 
nerships, which  are  allowed  by  a  general  law  to  all :  and  more  careful 
provision  is  even  made  for  informing  the  public  by  annual  advertise- 
ments or  official  returns  of  the  condition  of  these  Corporations,  which 
is  not  required  of  limited  copartnerships.  What  analogy  there  is 
between  mortmain,  which  your  Excellency  knows,  is,  properly  under- 
stood, a  perpetual  dedication  of  land  to  religious  uses,  and  applying 
it  to  the  purposes  of  a  Cotton  Mill,  or  Banking  house,  by  a  Corpora- 
tion '  for  transacting  ordinary  business,'  whose  shares  are  daily  bought 


15 

and  sold  in  open  market,  we  are  unable  to  conceive.  Still  more 
difficult  is  it  for  us  to  trace  the  operation  of  your  Excellency's  imagi- 
nation in  connecting  these  Corporations  with  the  '  prohibition  of 
entails  and  the  equal  distribution  of  property.'  When  a  stockholder 
in  a  Bank  or  Manufacturing  Company  dies,  his  shares  are  divided 
like  other  property  among  his  heirs,  or  sold  to  pay  his  debts,  and  we 
cannot  conceive  why  '  property  thus  holden  in  perpetual  succession,' 
does  not  '  come  under  the  full  operation  of  our  statutes  of  distribu- 
tion.' And  to  say  that  '  the  Corporation  remains  unchanged,'  and 
*  continues  to  hold  the  corporate  property,'  is  simply  to  affirm,  that  it  is 
always  holden  under  the  same  corporate  name,  though  by  a  continual 
succession  of  new  proprietors; — a  'perpetuity'  not  very  dangerous, 
one  would  think,  to  the  '  democratic  principle.' 

'Reestablish  entails  and  the  right  of  primogeniture,'  says  the  Ad- 
dress, while  on  this  topic,  '  and  I  shall  despair  of  the  continuance  of 
our  government;'  and  the  danger  that  this  will  really  be  done,  is 
deemed  so  imminent  by  your  Excellency,  that  a  wish  is  expressed 
that  '  they  were  forbidden  by  the  Constitution.'  The  Majority  of 
the  Legislature  are  under  the  impression  that  there  is  no  provision  in 
any  act  of  incorporation  ever  passed  in  this  Commonwealth,  directly  or 
indirectly  looking  to  either  of  these  objects,  so  deprecated  in  the  Ad- 
dress :  nor  have  they  ever  heard  from  any  other  source,  that  either 
measure  was  desired,  feared,  or  even  thought  of  by  any  rational  beino- 
in  the  State.  But  lest  your  Excellency's  language  should  undesignedly 
suggest  to  some  simple  minded  persons  that  such  are  among  the  pro- 
jects of  the  Whig  Party,  the  Majority  of  the  Legislature  seriously  pro- 
test that  they  have  no  such  designs  in  view,  either  by  means  of  manu- 
facturing corporations  or  otherwise. 

So  far  are  Corporations  of  the  kind  alluded  to,  from  producing 
the  injurious  effects  imputed  to  them,  that  they  greatly  increase  the 
opportunities  for  men  of  moderate  property  to  engage  in  enterprises 
beneficial  to  themselves  and  the  public,  which  otherwise  could  be 
prosecuted  only  by  the  very  rich.  The  man  of  small  property,  by 
means  of  a  share  in  a  Bank,  which  any  one  can  buy,  comes  into  the 
market  as  a  money  lender  in  fair  competition  with  the  great  Capitalist, 
though  he  has  himself  but  a  small  sum  to  lend;  and  by  means  of  a 
share  in  a  Manufacturing  Company,  equally  accessible  to  all,  he  enters, 
on  equal  terms  with  the  richest  man  in  the  community,  into  the 
business  of  manufacturing,  from  which  he  would  otherwise  be  wholly 
excluded  for  want  of  sufficient  capital.  In  England,  where  large 
properties  exist,  holden  together  by  the  right  of  primogeniture  and 
perpetuated  trusts,  private  corporations  are  comparatively  few,  and  single 
fortunes  and  rich  partnerships  monopolize  those  undertakings,  which 
here,    by  means  of  these  corporations,  diffuse  their  benefits  among 


16 

numbers.  Which  system  is  most  congenial  with  the  '  democratic 
principle,'  properly  understood,  it  is  unnecessary  to  state.  It  requires 
but  very  little  consideration  to  perceive  what  would  have  been  the 
condition  of  Massachusetts,  in  prosperity  and  productive  industry,  with- 
out these  institutions — compared  with  that  which  it  now  exhibits.  Its 
vast  water  power — a  great  element  of  its  natural  wealth,  a  gigantic 
laborer  that  now  works  day  and  night  without  food  or  rest  in  the 
service  of  the  State — would  have  spent  its  strength  in  idleness,  but  for 
this  mode  of  associating  capital  for  its  employment;  or  it  would  have 
been  taken  up  at  low  prices  by  the  very  rich,  who  would  thus  have 
monopolized  its  immense  advantages.  The  policy  that  would  destroy 
these  companies,  by  stimulating  a  popular  prejudice  against  them, 
strikes  at  the  root  of  the  prosperity,  not  only  of  our  manufactures,  but 
of  our  agriculture  and  commerce,  now  so  dependent  upon  manufactures. 
It  is  a  policy  that  would  drive  our  population  and  capital  into  other 
States,  which  would  be  glad  to  receive  them,  even  if  they  brought  with 
them  the  formidable  '  vice  of  transacting  ordinary  business  by  means 
of  charters  of  incorporation.'  If  any  one  supposes  that  the  manufac- 
tures of  this  Commonwealth  could  have  been  carried  on  to  any  thing 
like  their  present  extent,  without  these  charters,  it  could  only  be 
because  enormous  fortunes  would  have  been  realized  by  those  whose 
wealth  enabled  them  first  to  embark  in  those  enterprizes,  until  by 
degrees  they  became  engrossed  in  the  hands  of  a  great  manufacturing 
aristocracy,  instead  of  being  carried  on  by  the  united  means  of  small 
capitalists.  That  such  an  effect  would  have  been  produced,  we  do  not 
believe,  at  least  for  many  years  to  come ;  because  to  prosecute  such 
undertakings  successfully  by  individuals,  requires  not  only  large  means, 
but  a  capacity  for  the  business  not  always  united  with  them ;  while  by 
means  of  these  corporations,  both  capital  and  skill  are  associated  in 
the  most  advantageous  and  economical  manner. 

Your  Excellency  mentions  with  sorrow  that  '  our  ancient  and 
venerated  Commonwealth  has  incurred,  and  is  subject  to  heavy 
responsibilities,'  by  granting  its  credit  in  aid  of  several  great  works 
of  Internal  Improvement ;  and  considers  that  *  many  objections  exist 
to  this  mode  of  embarking  the  credit  or  the  resources  of  the  State,' 
and  that  the  construction  of  such  works  by  the  State,  would  be  unjust, 
because  the  '  laws  of  nature '  here  '  forbid  a  general  and  equal 
distribution'  of  them.  But  notwithstanding  the  very  unequal  surface 
of  our  soil,  we  cannot  think  the  last  remark  is  practically  true,  in  any 
degree  at  all  peculiar  to  this  State.  The  Rail  Roads  completed  and  in 
progress,  are  not  confined  to  any  particular  section  of  the  Common- 
wealth. They  branch  off  in  every  direction  from  the  Capital,  which  must 
necessarily  be  the  terminus  of  such  works  ;  and  the  western  part  of  the 
State,  which  is  the  one  to  which  it  is  most  difficult  to  conduct  them, 


17 

and   which   had  been   least   benefitted    by   private  enterprises  of  this 
character,  has  received  the  largest  assistance  from  the  public. 

The  objections  stated  by  your  Excellency  to  this  mode  of  embarking 
the  credit  or  the  resources  of  the  State,  do  not  strike  our  minds  with 
much  force.  We  cannot  perceive  that  tiie  State  labors  under  any 
disadvantage  in  these  undertakings,  because  it  is  not  true  that  it  is 
called  on  to  '  compete  with  individual  shrewdness  and  diligence.'  In 
the  Western  Rail  Road,  the  only  one  of  these  works  in  which  it  holds 
stock — a  work  carried  on  at  common  expense  and  for  the  common 
benefit — it  must  share  alike  in  gain  or  loss  with  the  other  corporators. 
If  the  State  were  to  attempt  to  construct  one  Rail  Road,  and  individuals 
another,  in  competition  with  it,  the  objection  might  be  sound.  Nor 
can  we  learn  either  from  principle  or  experience,  that  it  is  wise  to 
forego  all  great  works  of  public  improvement  until  individuals  are  able 
to  complete  them.  The  history  of  public  improvements  in  the  other 
States,  appears  to  us  not  to  justify  so  timid  a  policy.  But  the  possibility 
of  the  Commonwealth  becoming  actually  liable  for  the  $5,000,000 
principal,  and  $300,000  annual  interest  and  expenses,  in  which  it  is 
said  to  be  embarked  for  these  objects,  seems  to  weigh  most  heavily 
upon  your  Excellency's  mind  :  and  lest  this  should  appear  like  a 
confirmation  of  the  appeals  to  the  fears  of  the  people,  with  which 
itinerant  demagogues  and  factious  newspapers  have  endeavoured  to 
alarm  them,  into  a  belief  that  their  farms  are  all  deeply  mortgaged 
for  these  extravagant  undertakings,  (but  which  statements  your 
Excellency,  we  are  happy  to  perceive,  qualifies  by  the  important  con- 
dition, '  should  they  become  fixed  upon  the  Commonwealth,')  we  will 
endeavor  to  show  how  little  ground  there  is  for  such  an  apprehension. 

The  first  of  these  appropriations  was  the  loan  of  $400,000  of  the 
scrip  of  the  State,  made  to  the  Norwich  and  Worcester  Rail  Road 
Corporation.  At  that  time,  the  Boston  and  Providence,  the  Boston 
and  Worcester,  and  the  Boston  and  Lowell  Roads  were  in  successful 
operation,  and  had  satisfactorily  solved  all  doubts  of  the  utility  and 
productiveness  of  such  works.  Between  that  time,  and  April  1839, 
$4,100,000  of  State  scrip  had  been  loaned,  to  the  Eastern,  the 
Western,  the  Boston  and  Portland,  the  Nashua  and  Lowell,  and  the 
New  Bedford  and  Taunton  Rail  Roads,  in  different  sums,  all  bearing 
interest  at  5  per  cent.  And  in  all  these  cases,  the  whole  income  of 
the  Road,  and  the  whole  Road  itself,  and  the  whole  equipment  of 
engines,  cars,  and  other  property,  are  pledged  to  the  State  to  pay  the 
interest  and  principal  of  the  loans. 

Now  let  us  see  what  is  the  probability  that  any  of  these  loans  will 
'become  fixed  on  the  Commonwealth,'  and  operate  as  a  mortgage  upon 
every  man's  farm. 

The  Eastern  Rail  Road,  until  December  last,  was  open  only  as  far 
3 


18 

as  Salem.  This  Corporation  lias  received  a  loan  of  8500,000,  of 
which  the  annual  interest  is  §25,000  ;  the  net  income  from  that  part 
of  the  Road,  was  the  last  year  §72,446  98,  nearly  three  times  as  much 
as  the  annual  interest  on  the  loan. 

The  Nashua  and  Lowell  Rail  Road  received  a  loan  of  $50,000 
scrip,  of  which  the  annual  interest  is  $2,500.  The  net  income  during 
the  last  year,  which  was  the  fir.st  of  its  operation,  and  therefore 
cannot  be  supposed  a  fair  average,  was  @28,S95  15,  more  than  ten 
times  as  much  as  the  interest  on  the  loan. 

The  Boston  and  Portland  Rail  Road  received  a  loan  of  8150,000 
scrip,  of  which  the  annual  interest  is  87,500.  The  net  income  of  the 
Road,  during  the  past  year,  was  $25,678  46,  about  three  and  a  half 
times  as  much  as  the  annual  interest  on  the  loan. 

The  Western  Rail  R,oad  received  a  loan  of  8:3,300,000  scrip,  of 
which  the  annual  interest  is  .$165,000.  This  Road  has  been  open  only 
a  few  months  between  Worcester  and  Springfield;  and  under  the  dis- 
advantages of  a  winter  in  which  the  snow  has  been  peculiarly  heavy, 
of  a  great  stagnation  of  business,  and  of  the  Road  not  having  yet 
reached  any  great  line  of  communication  towards  the  West,  it  has 
more  than  paid  its  current  expenses  by  twenty-two  per  cent.  No 
computation  can  be  made  from  that  of  its  probable  receipts,  when 
finished  so  as  to  meet  the  Hudson  and  Albany  Rail  Roads ;  thus, 
opening  a  communication  between  the  Capital  of  New  England, — the 
whole  lines  of  the  Erie  and  Northern  Canals, — and  the  various  Rail 
Roads  leading  from  the  Hudson  w^estward  to  the  great  chain  of 
Western  Lakes.  We  may  however  approximate  it  thus : — It  is  a 
continuation  of  the  Boston  and  Worcester  Rail  Road,  and  will  be 
about  three  times  as  long,  with  advantages  not  greatly  inferior  to 
tliose  at  present  enjoyed  by  that  Road  ;  and  if  its  net  income  be  as 
crreat  per  mile,  it  will  amount  to  about  8316,000,  which  will  not  fall 
much  below  twice  the  annual  interest  on  the  loan.  Besides  which, 
there  is  a  sinking  fund  provided  by  the  Act  creating  the  loan,  con- 
sisting of  the  premium  on  sale  of  the  scrip,  which  on  the  81,228,000 
of  scrip  already  sold  is  8137,605  30,  and  will  be,  when  the  whole  is 
sold,  8304,265  09,  which  is  to  be  kept  .at  compound  interest  for  the 
thirty  years,  towards  paying  the  principal  loan  ;  and  at  the  rate  at 
which  the  8137,608  already  received  has  been  loaned,  this  fund,  with 
an  addition  of  1  per  cent,  on  the  whole  loan,  to  be  annually  paid  from 
the  income  of  the  Road,  (833,000,)  will  entirely  discharge  the  whole 
principal  of  the  loan  when  it  falls  due. 

The  foregoing  are  all  the  Rail  Roads,  that  have  received  loans, 
w^hich  are  now  opened  for  travel. — The  others,  the  New  Bedford  and 
Taunton,  and  the  Norwich  and  Worcester,  will  be  opened,  the  former 
in  the  summer,  and  the  latter  in  the  spring  of  the  present  year;    and 


19 

that  they  will  be  so  productive  as  to  malie  the  Commonwealth  perfectly 
safe  in  its  responsibilities  for  them,  seems  not  less  certain,  than  in  the 
cases  already  stated.  So  far  therefore  as  the  $4,500,000  of  scrip 
loaned  to  these  Rail  Roads  is  concerned,  it  seems  preposterous  to 
attempt  to  alarm  the  fears  of  the  community.  While  the  business 
of  the  State  continues  to  be  such  as  to  give  the  '  immoveable  property' 
within  it  any  value,  which  will  make  it  worth  the  keeping,  these  great 
Imes,  communicating  between  the  Metropolis  and  the  neighboring 
States,  cannot  fail  to  produce  an  income,  and  be  worth  a  capital  which 
reduce  all  apprehensions  of  these  loans  becoming  fixed  on  the  Common- 
wealth, to  a  political  absurdity. 

Besides  these  loans,  the  State  has  subscribed  for  $1,000,000  of 
stock  in  the  Western  Rail  Road.  Upon  this  it  must  take  its  chance 
with  the  other  stockholders,  of  gain  and  loss;  but  '  individual  shrewd- 
ness and  diligence'  has  already  subscribed  and  paid  in  nearly  $600,000, 
and  must  before  the  whole  scrip  is  issued  pay  in  $200,000  more,  and 
it  can  hardly  be  imagined  that  any  considerable  loss  can  in  any  event 
be  "sustained  by  the  Commonwealth  upon  its  subscription.  But  even 
if  half  the  entire  subscription  were  sunk,  what  would  be  the  loss  of 
the  sum  of  even  $oOO,000,  compared  with  the  opening  of  a  rapid  and 
constant  line  of  communication  between  the  Capital  of  the  State 
and  the  great  Western  waters  ?  How  inconsiderable  would  such 
a  loss  appear,  when  compared  with  the  incidental  advantages  to  be 
derived  by  the  whole  line  of  country  through  which  it  passes,  from  the 
easy  communication  between  the  distant  parts  of  our  own  Common- 
wealth, now  divided  by  chains  of  mountains  that  have  heretofore 
turned  the  business  of  our  western  counties  to  the  city  of  New  York? 
This  view  of  the  case,  however,  is  one  that  goes  far  beyond  the  extent 
of  the  State's  actual  liability  to  loss.  Only  forty  per  cent,  of  the 
whole  State  subscription,  that  is  $400,000.  is  ever  to  be  paid  in.  Both 
State  and  individual  stockholders  are  to  pay  in  forty  per  cent,  of  their 
subscriptions,  and  the  State  loan  does  all  the  rest.  The  amount  therefore 
put  at  risk  by  the  State,  upon  the  success  of  this  enterprise,  is  merely 
the  loss  that  may  be  sustained  upon  the  depreciation  of  $400,000  of 
stock ;  and  this  cannot  he  stated  at  so  large  a  sum  as  not  to  be  amply 
repaid,  in  the  increase  of  productive  industry  and  taxable  property, 
by  this  great  improvement. 

But  when  we  look  back  to  the  gradual  steps  by  which  this  policy 
has  been  introduced,  it  is  with  some  surprise  that  we  now  read  your 
Excellency's  disapproval  of  it.  It  is  believed  to  have  been  first  recom- 
mended by  Gov.  Eustis,  who  though  he  made  less  use  of  the  word 
*  Democracy,'  has  been  esteemed  a  consistent  friend  of  popular  rights. 
In  his  Message  of  Jan.  0,  ]b2."),  he  strongly  presented  this  subject  to 
the  Legislature.      He  observed  that  '  while  other  States  are  leading 


20 

(he  way  in  improvements  within  their  territorial  limits,  on  a  great 
scale  and  at  a  great  expense,  the  citizens  of  Massachusetts  cannot  be 
indifferent  spectators  of  their  progress,  or  of  the  benefits  to  be  derived 
from  them.'  After  enumerating  the  projects  which  had  been  then 
contemplated,  viz.  :  canals  to  unite  Buzzard's  Bay  and  Narragansett 
Bay  with  Massachusetts  Bay,  he  remarlvs  that  '  a  water  communication 
from  Boston  to  and  through  the  western  parts  of  the  State,  would  tend 
greatly  to  advance  the  interests  of  agriculture,  and  of  the  numerous 
manufactories  established  in  the  interior.  The  present  state  of  the 
Treasury  will  not,  I  am  sensible,  admit  of  the  application  of  funds  to 
any  considerable  amount  to  objects  of  this  nature.  The  iirtie  may,  it 
is  hoped,  not  be  distant,  when  the  State  may  be  able  to  assist  cnter- 
prizing  and  public  spirited  individuals  who  may  engage  in  them.' 
Such  was  the  'democratic  principle'  of  that  day ;  and  in  pursuance 
of  this  recommendation,  the  Legislature  passed  a  Resolve  appointing  a 
Board  of  Commissioners,  to  survey  the  route  of  a  Canal  from  Boston 
Harbor  to  Connecticut  River,  and  from  Connecticut  River  to  the 
Hudson.  That  Resolve  vi'as  approved  by  your  Excellency,  then 
acting  Governor  ;  and  under  it,  that  unquestionable  Democrat,  the 
Hon.  Nathan  Willis,  was  appointed  by  your  Excellency,  and  acted  as 
Commissioner.  Had  the  numerous  and  alarming  objections  to  this 
policy  which  are  set  forth  in  the  Address,  then  occurred  to  your  Ex- 
cellency's mind,  it  would  have  been  in  your  power  to  avert  the  passage 
of  the  Resolve,  and  thus  prevent  the  Commonwealth  from  embarking 
in  a  system,  which  your  Excellency  now  contemplates  with  unavail- 
ing '  sorrow  and  regret.' 

When  the  time  foreseen  by  Gov.  Eustis  as  not  far  distant  had 
arrived,  this  policy  was  adopted  by  the  Legislature  without  distinction 
of  party,  and  on  the  principle  that  it  was  safe  and  salutary.  The  very 
first  step  in  the  cause,  was  the  granting  of  the  credit  of  the  Common- 
wealth to  the  Norwich  and  Worcester  Rail  Road,  for  the  sum  of 
$400,000.  That  measure  was  thus  urged  upon  the  Legislature  in 
an  editorial  article  of  the  newspaper,  which  claims  and  is  supposed 
more  peculiarly  to  represent  your  Excellency's  political  sentiments, 
and  to  enjoy  your  Excellency's  patronage  and  confidence. — '  If  the 
State  is  made  secure,  as  we  think  it  may  be,  we  can  see  no  possible 
objection  to  granting  the  necessary  aid.  It  is  the  part  of  wisdom 
and  sound  policy  for  the  Government  to  give  all  reasonable  encour- 
agement to  these  great  works  of  public  enterprise  ;  and  the  mode 
proposed  by  the  Company  seems  to  be  free  from  objection.' — 
Such  may  be  presumed  to  have  been  the  opinion  of  the  Party  at  that 
time;  and  the  Report  in  favor  of  the  loan  was  made  unanimously  by  a 
Committee  composed  of  both  political  parties,  and  was  adopted  with  a 
very  inconsiderable  opposition  in  the  Legislature.     Again,  the  motion 


21 

for  the  original  subscription  for  $1,000,000  of  stock  in  the  Western 
Rail  Road  Corporation,  made  and  urged  by  prominent  members  of 
your  Excellency's  party,  prevailed  in  the  Legislature  by  a  vote  almost 
unanimous.  The  same  remark  might  be  made  of  all  the  subsequent 
Acts  granting  the  use  of  the  Commonwealth's  credit  to  this  and  similar 
undertakings.  They  were  all  sustained  by  a  large  majority  of  your  Ex- 
cellency's party.  It  was  only  when  the  policy  had  proceeded  too  far  to 
be  retraced,  that  it  was  discovered  by  the  organs  of  that  party,  that  some 
selfish  purposes  might  be  served  by  bringing  the  subject  within  the  range 
of  political  warfare.  From  that  time  they  began  to  change  their  tone. 
The  objects  themselves  were  not  denied  to  be  of  public  utility;  but  the 
only  practicable  method  of  accomplishing  them,  was  assailed.  Repre- 
sentations of  the  amount  of  principal  and  annual  interest  for  which  the 
faith  of  the  State  was  pledged,  were  artfully  drawn  up,  so  as  to  lead 
those  unacquainted  with  the  subject  to  believe,  that  they  were  really  to 
be  a  charge  upon  the  Treasury.  The  emissaries  of  party  throuo-hout 
the  Commonwealth,  alarmed  the  agricultural  interest  with  portentous 
calculations  of  the  extent  to  which  each  farmer's  property,  as  they 
pretended,  was  mortgaged,  for  the  payment  of  the  cost  of  these  works. 
And  thus  a  system  of  internal  improvement,  absolutely  necessary  to 
preserve  the  value  of  the  whole  property  of  the  Commonwealth  from 
being  ruinously  reduced,  by  the  superior  natural  and  artificial  advan- 
tages of  other  States  in  the  means  of  communication — a  system  origi- 
nally urged  and  promoted  by  the  same  party,  that  now  for  its  own 
miserable  purposes  condemns  it — has  been  most  mischievously  in- 
volved in  some  degree  of  unpopularity. 

Your  Excellency  passes  to  the  consideration  of  the  finances  of  the 
Commonwealth,  and  observes,  that  '  We  present  the  extraordinary 
spectacle  of  a  State,  rich  in  its  internal  resources,  in  the  treasures  it 
draws  from  the  ocean,  in  the  accumulated  capital  of  many  years  of 
labor  and  economy,  in  the  habitual  industry  and  frugality  of  its 
inhabitants,  and  in  the  export  of  the  surplus  of  its  fisheries  and  manu- 
factures— narrow  and  compact  in  its  territory,  dense  in  its  population, 
advanced  in  civilization  and  in  moral  and  intellectual  refinement, 
with  the  most  facile  and  convenient  means  of  intercommunication — 
in  short,  so  surrounded  with  natural  and  artificial  advantages,  as  to  be 
capable  of  the  best  possible  government  at  the  least  possible  expense — 
during  a  period  of  peace  and  productiveness,  annually  incurring  debts 
to  meet  its  current  expenses.'  It  is  believed  that  if  the  mode  be  ex- 
amined, in  which  the  existing  debt  of  less  than  $300,000  has  been 
accumulated,  it  will  not  be  regarded  as  a  '  very  extraordinary  specta- 
cle.' A  solitary  one  it  certainly  is  not ;  for  there  are  very  iew  States 
in  the  Union,  whose  financial  condition  is  near  as  prosperous  as  that  of 
Massachusetts.     But  why  is  it  so  extraordinary,  that  a  people  with  all 


22 

ihe  resources  your  Excellency  describes,  should  not  have  a  revenue 
sufficient  to  defray  the  expenses  of  Government  without  any  taxation  ? 
Of  what  avail  are  the  '  rich  internal  resources  of  the  State ' — '  the 
treasures  it  draws  from  the  ocean' — 'its  accumulated  capital' — its 
'habitual  industry,  and  the  amount  of  its  exports'  ?  These,  indeed, 
indicate  the  ability  of  the  people,  not  only  to  maintain  the  mere  ma- 
chinery of  Government,  but  to  aid  in  the  promotion  of  those  great 
interests  of  benevolence,  education,  and  public  improvement,  which 
deserve  the  countenance  of  an  enlightened  Government.  But  this 
ability  cannot  be  made  available  without  taxation,  direct  or  indirect. 
For  twelve  of  the  last  fifteen  years,  all  direct  taxation  has  been  dis- 
pensed with  ;  and  the  expenses  of  the  Government  have  been  paid 
almost  wholly  by  the  revenue  raised  from  Banks  and  Auctions,  with- 
out any  burden  to  the  people  at  large.  Your  Excellency  is  aware  also, 
that  if  the  amount  of  several  items  of  expenditure  of  a  permanent  char- 
acter be  deducted  from  the  amount  of  the  debt,  it  would  leave  but  a 
small  sum  fairly  chargeable  to  the  excess  of  expenditure  for  '  current 
expenses'  over  the  income.  And  this  excess  is  owing  in  a  much 
greater  degree  to  the  decrease  of  the  income,  in  consequence  of  the 
downfall  of  the  Banks,  than  to  any  increase  of  the  expenses. 

Thus  it  appears,  from  the  Report  of  the  Treasurer,  that  the  Bank 
Tax,  the  principal  resource  of  the  State,  has,  during  the  last  three 
years,  fallen  off  from  $^^79,175,  to  §341,308 — a  difference  in  this  item 
of  §37,867,  in  the  revenue  of  the  past  year  as  compared  with  that  of 
1837.  But  it  is  manifestly  impossible  in  all  cases  to  make  an  instan- 
taneous curtailment  in  the  expenses  of  the  Commonwealth  to  meet  a 
sudden  decline  of  this  description  in  the  finances.  Had  one  half  of 
every  salary  paid  from  the  Treasury,  been  retrenched,  it  would  not 
have  much  more  than  sufficed  to  counteract  the  effect  of  this  reduction 
in  the  Bank  Tax. 

Although  your  Excellency  cautiously  deals  in  generalities,  there  is 
a  strong  implication  in  the  Address,  that  the  excess  in  the  expen- 
diture is  owing  to  'supernumerary  officers,'  '  agencies  or  commissions,' 
or  too  high  a  compensation  paid  to  the  public  officers.  If  this  be  the 
case,  we  join  in  the  sentiment  that  the  supernumeraries  should  be 
discharged,  and  the  excess  of  compensation  retrenched.  But  is  there 
any  reason  to  suppose  that  such  is  a  fact  ?  A  most  respectable  and 
competent  Committee  of  the  last  House  of  Representatives  reported, 
that  a  reduction  of  between  six  and  seven  thousand  dollars,  was  all 
that  could  possibly  be  made  in  this  way,  which  constitutes  but  about 
one  tenth  part  of  the  excess  of  the  last  year's  expenses  over  the  income 
of  the  State. 

We  believe  it  a  sound  republican  policy,  that  salaries  should  be 
moderate;  and  it  may  not  be  very  easy  in  all  cases  to  fix  a  fair  standard 


23 

of  compensation.  Those  paid  to  the  highest  State  officers  in  Mas- 
sachusetts, are  considerably  lower  than  the  salaries  paid  to  the  officers 
of  the  General  Government  residing  here.  The  officer  who  fills  the 
place  of  Collector  of  the  Port  of  Boston  and  Superintendent  of  lio-ht 
houses,  is  paid  a  much  larger  sum  than  the  Chief  Magistrate  of 
Massachusetts.  The  salary  of  the  Postmaster  of  Boston,  (whose 
duties  are  almost  wholly  discharged  by  his  clerks,)  with  his  per- 
quisites, is  probably  twice  the  compensation  of  the  Chief  Justice 
of  the  Commonwealth.  We  have  never  understood  that  the  salaries 
paid  to  the  officers  of  the  General  Government  in  Massachusetts,  were 
deemed  too  large  by  those  who  receive  them,  or  by  their  political 
friends  :  they  could  be  easily  reduced  by  an  Act  of  Congress,  if  your 
Excellency's  party  desired  it.  The  State  salaries  have  been  and  are 
a  favorite  subject  on  which  your  Excellency's  supporters  have  chosen 
to  exhibit  their  zeal  for  retrenchment  and  economy.  It  strikes  us  as 
somewhat  singular,  that  they  should  not  employ  their  influence  in  the 
General  Government,  in  reducing  the  salaries  of  the  United  States' 
officers,  at  least  to  the  State  standard.  So  far  is  this  from  being  done, 
that  the  political  friends  of  your  Excellency  at  Washington,  have  within 
a  few  weeks  been  employed  in  raising  instead  of  lowering  the  federal 
salaries.  Before  the  bill  for  establishing  the  independent  treasury 
was  urged  through  the  Senate,  a  considerable  increase  of  the  salaries 
provided  by  it,  for  the  receivers  of  the  Public  Monies,  was  moved  by 
Mr.  Benton,  and  advocated  by  Mr.  Wright  of  New  York.  It  was 
opposed  by  Mr.  Davis  of  Massachusetts,  one  of  your  Excellency's 
predecessors,  and  a  consistent  advocate  of  reform,  on  the  ground  that 
the  salaries  already  provided  by  the  bill,  were  fully  equal  to  those  of 
the  State  officers. 

Your  Excellency  recommends,  on  this  topic,  that  '  nothing  be 
added  to  salaries  for  vain  show  or  ostentatious  display — nothing  on 
account  of  famili/  07-  friends.'  We  are  not  aware  that  there  exists,  in 
the  past  legislation  of  the  Commonwealth,  any  ground  for  this  covert 
reproach  of  'family  influence;'  but  inasmuch  as  Mr.  Senator  Benton, 
in  moving  the  increase  of  salaries  just  alluded  to.  expressly  put  it  on 
the  ground  that  '  the  officers  engaged  under  the  bill  ought  to  be  men 
oi  family  and  respectability,'  your  Excellency's  admonition,  instead  of 
being  addressed  to  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts,  where  it  is  wholly 
uncalled  for,  might  perhaps  be  better  applied  to  your  friends  in 
Congress,  before  this  portion  of  the  Sub-treasury  Bill  passes  beyond 
the  reach  of  amendment.  Should  it  fill  to  be  respected  there,  it  could 
hardly  strengthen  the  suspicion  already  existing,  that  retrcnchuicut  and 
reform,  as  recently  inculcated,  arc  words  without  a  meaning,  designed 
to  raise  a  prejudice  again.st  political  opponents,  and  never  intended  to 
be  put  in  practice.     The  country  has  not  forgotten  the  professions  of 


24 

economy  with  which  the  late  President  of  the  United  States  entered 
into  office,  nor  the  unexampled  profusion  which  marked  his  ad- 
ministration. 

Your  Excellency  states  that  the  expenses  of  the  Government  can  be 
brouofht  within  its  present  income ;  but  has  not  been  pleased  to 
intimate  the  items  of  expenditure  on  which  the  retrenchment  can  be 
made.  On  the.  contrary,  a  reduction  in  nearly  all  those  particulars 
where  it  might  most  easily  be  affected,  is  directly,  or  by  implication, 
discountenanced  in  the  Address.  It  is  stated  there,  that  the  ex- 
penses of  administering  the  Government  have  doubled  in  the  last  fifteen 
years.  In  nothing  has  the  increase  been  more  rapid  than  in  the 
county  balances.  These  in  1825  amounted  to  but  $17,617.  The 
sum  of  $09,000  was  appropriated  for  this  object  the  past  year,  and 
will,  it  is  understood,  prove  insufficient  to  settle  all  the  accounts. 
Your  Excellency  intimates  that  any  attempts  to  diminish  this  burden- 
some and  growing  charge,  by  transferring  it  to  the  Counties,  '  would 
operate  unrighteously  and  oppressively.' 

In  like  manner  the  Address  intimates  that  it  would  be  '  unrighteous 
and  oppressive '  to  charge  upon  the  towns  the  support  of  the  State 
paupers;  consequently  there  should,  in  your  Excellency's  opinion,  be 
no  reduction  in  the  sum  of  $48,000  paid  from  the  treasury  of  the 
Commonwealth  the  past  year  for  this  object. 

By  far  the  heaviest  item  of  the  State  expenditure,  is  the  pay  of  the 
Members  of  the  Legislature.  It  is  here  that  the  great  increase  has 
taken  place  in  the  last  fifteen  years,  and  not  in  '  salaries,  agencies  and 
commissions.'  In  the  year  1825,  the  pay  of  the  Legislature  was 
$36, 603;  in  the  year  1837,  it  was  $164,583; — a  difference  more  than 
exceeding,  in  a  single  year,  all  that  has  been  paid  in  the  whole  fifteen 
years,  for  all  the  agencies  and  commissions  alluded  to  by  your 
Excellency,  and  all  the  scientific  surveys  and  expenses  for  the  pro- 
motion of  education,  which  have  formed  so  prominent  a  topic  of 
accusation  against  your  Excellency's  predecessors.  It  would  have 
seemed  the  part  of  candor,  in  descanting  on  the  subject  of  the 
increased  expense  of  administering  the  Government,  to  employ,  amidst 
the  generalities  with  which  it  is  treated,  a  language  including  at  least, 
if  it  did  not  place  in  strong  light,  the  real  cause  of  by  far  the  greatest 
increase ;  and  to  have  avoided  a  phraseology,  which  would  lead  the 
uninformed  to  the  impression  that  '  supernumerary  officers,'  and  ex- 
travagant compensations,  are  the  chief  cause  of  an  effect,  mainly 
produced  by  the  enormous  growth  of  the  House  of  Representatives. — 
It  appears  also  that  in  placing  the  present  state  of  the  finances  in 
contrast  with  their  condition  '  fifteen  years'  ago,  when  your  Excellency 
for  a  few  months  occupied  the  chair  of  State,  it  would  have  con- 
tributed  to  a  fair  perception  of  the  merits  of  the  question,  as  one  of 


25 

comparative  economy,  to  mention  the  fact  that  fifteen  years  ago  a 
State  Tax  was  paid,  and  the  towns  were  obliged  to  reimburse  to  the 
State  treasury  the  pay  advanced  to  their  Representatives.  If,  as  your 
Excellency  emphatically  states,  '  the  cost  of  administering  the  Govern- 
ment has  been  more  than  doubled  within  the  last  fifteen  years,'  it  is 
not  less  true,  though  not  mentioned  by  your  Excellency,  that  in  this 
same  period,  the  Representatives  have  been  paid,  not  as  before  by  the 
towns,  but  out  of  the  State  treasury,  and  the  people  have  been  relieved 
for  the  first  time,  it  is  believed  since  the  settlement  of  the  country, 
from  a  direct  annual  tax.  In  the  year  1825,  the  sum  of  $94,447  was 
received  into  the  State  treasury  from  the  direct  tax,  and  the  reimburse- 
ment of  the  pay  of  the  Representatives.  Had  a  like  sum  been  so 
raised  for  the  twelve  of  the  next  fifteen  years  in  which  no  tax  was 
laid,  it  would  have  exceeded  $1,100,000,  which  would  have  been 
drawn  from  the  people  in  the  last  'fifteen  years,'  by  direct  taxation,  to 
meet  the  increased  expenditure.  Besides  all  this,  it  will  be  remembered 
that  within  the  period  mentioned  by  your  Excellency,  the  compensation 
of  various  judicial  and  other  officers,  to  a  great  amount,  has  been  paid 
by  salaries  from  the  Treasury,  instead  of  larger  sums  before  drawn  in 
fees  from  the  citizens. 

The  Majority  of  the  Legislature  are  happy  to  agree  with  your 
Excellency  in  most  of  the  remarks  contained  in  the  Address  on  the 
subject  of  Education.  But  while  your  Excellency  very  justly  dilates 
upon  the  importance  of  the  free  schools,  we  are  surprised  to  learn 
from  your  Excellency,  that  '  recently  great  labor  has  been  bestowed 
upon  and  great  improvements  made  in  some  departments  of  educa- 
tion;' but  that  'the  very  improvements  in  the  higher  branches,  and 
in  the  more  elevated  seminaries,  excite  the  ambition  and  engross  the 
attention  of  those  most  active  in  the  cause  of  education,  and  thus 
expose  the  common  schools  to  fall  into  neglect  and  disrepute.'  The 
very  reverse  of  all  this  seems  to  us  to  be  true,  at  least  so  far  as  concerns 
the  action  of  the  Legislature,  to  whom  this  admonition  is  addressed. 
Your  Excellency  must  be  aware,  that  of  late  years  the  Legislature  has 
omitted  all  appropriations  for  the  encouragement  of  the  'more  elevated 
seminaries,'  and  has  established  a  Board  of  Education,  whose  labors 
are  required  by  law  to  be  exclusively  devoted  to  the  improvement  of 
the  common  schools.  We  are  quite  at  a  loss  to  comprehend  what 
changes,  in  this  particular,  your  Excellency  would  recommend.  It  is 
new  to  us  if  the  'children  of  the  poor — the  weak — depressed — and 
the  neglected,'  have  not,  so  far  as  the  Legislature  can  provide  it, 
'  suitable  means  of  instruction,'  or  that  the  *  town  schools  are  not 
open  to  all.' 

We  now  approach  a  portion  of  the  Address,  which  affects  us 
with  more  serious  concern  than  the  misapprehensions  of  your  Ex- 
4 


26 

cellency  to  which  we  have  already  adverted.  The  sanction  by 
your  Excellency  of  the  catch-words  of  party  excitement,  though  it 
seems  to  us  not  to  accord  with  the  dignity  of  the  station  from  which 
your  Excellency  has  been  removed,  or  of  that  to  which  you  have  been 
called,  we  readily  admit  is  in  some  degree  a  matter  of  taste  merely  ; 
and  the  endeavor  to  create  a  popular  dissatisfaction  with  the  measures 
of  your  Excellency's  predecessor,  however  mistaken  the  grounds  of  it, 
might  not  have  been  entirely  unexpected  under  existing  circumstances. 
But  that  your  Excellency's  accession  to  the  chief  magistracy  should 
have  been  made  the  occasion  of  such  attacks  upon  the  Constitution 
of  the  Commonwealth,  as  are  contained  in  the  Address,  has  moved 
the  astonishment  even  of  your  Excellency's  most  decided  opponents. 
To  these  attacks,  which  seem  calculated  to  undermine  the  very 
foundation  of  our  constitutional  liberties,  it  is  impossible  for  us  to 
reply  with  that  official  blandness  which  might  perhaps  be  required  in 
an  answer  from  the  body  of  the  Legislature.  We  approach  your 
Excellency  on  this  point,  with  the  feelings  of  citizens,  whose  great 
charter  of  freedom  is  assailed  from  the  quarter  where  it  should  find 
support  against  the  lawless  attempts  of  faction.  Your  Excellency 
declares  the  Constitution  of  Massachusetts  to  be  deficient  and  in- 
consistent, and  to  leave  a  portion  of  the  citizens  '  in  a  state  of  political 
servitude,'  because  paupers  and  spendthrifts  are  not  admitted  to  the  im- 
portant rights  of  suffrage,  and  of  making  laws  to  bind  the  other  citizens 
of  the  Commonwealth.  Because  it  declares  that  '  all  men  are  born 
free  and  equal,'  your  Excellency  reproaches  the  Constitution  with 
inconsistency  and  injustice,  in  refusing  to  give  the  highest  rights  of 
citizens  to  those,  whose  idleness,  intemperance,  or  profligacy,  have 
reduced  them  to  the  condition  of  dependents  on  public  charity,  or  so 
far  deprived  them  of  the  right  exercise  of  reason,  that  they  are  adjudged 
incapable  of  conducting  their  own  private  affairs.  The  provision  of 
the  Constitution  thus  assailed  by  your  Excellency  is  this :  That  every 
citizen  of  twenty-one  years  and  upwards,  (excepting  paupers  and 
persons  under  guardianship,)  who  shall  have  paid  any  tax  within 
two  years,  and  all  persons  exempted  by  law  from  taxation,  but  other- 
wise qualified,  shall  have  a  right  to  vote.  This  is  the  clause  termed 
by  your  Excellency  a  provision  reducing  a  portion  of  the  citizens 
to  '  a  state  of  political  servitude.'  And  who  are  these  oppressed 
persons,  for  whose  relief  your  Excellency  would  amend  'our  excellent 
Constitution?'  Adults  under  guardianship  are  excluded  from  the  list 
of  voters, — these  are  composed,  besides  the  insane,  (whom  we  do  not 
suppose  your  Excellency  would  include,)  wholly  of  adjudged  spend- 
thrifts and  common  drunkards.  Would  your  Excellency  have  those 
enlisted  among  the  supporters  of  the  new  '  Democratic  principle'  at  the 
polls?     The  only  other  class  excepted,  is  that  of  persons  not  exempted 


27 

by  law  from  taxation,  but  who  do  not  even  pay  a  Poll  Tax,  which  can  in 
no  case,  by  the  present  law,  exceed  a  dollar  and  a  half,  and  is  ordinarily 
fixed  at  a  dollar  only.  Of  this  class — far  more  numerous  than  is  com- 
monly supposed — the  most  obvious  individuals  are  public  paupers,  but 
the  greater  number  are  the  idle  and  profligate  who  prey  at  large  upon 
society.  These  your  Excellency  clearly  demands  should  be  allowed, 
not  only  to  vote,  in  the  election  of  all  officers,  but  to  sit  in  the  Legis- 
lature, making  laws  to  affect  the  property  of  every  industrious  citizen 
in  the  Commonwealth. 

There  is  no  mistaking  or  otherwise  explaining  your  Excellency's  lan- 
guage. In  speaking  of  the  Constitution,  your  Excellency  remarks,  that 
'while  in  one  section  it  declares  that  "  all  men  are  born  free  and  equal," 
and  that  the  "  body  politic"  is  a  voluntary  "  social  compact,"  to  which 
the  whole  people  and  each  citizen  are  parties  :  in  another,  it  excludes 
a  portion  of  them  from  any  participation  in  the  election  of  officers  or 
the  making  of  laws.  He  who  is  governed  by  laws,  in  the  formation  of 
which  he  had  no  voice,  is  in  a  state  of  political  servitude.  To  make 
the  right  of  suffrage  and  civil  liberty  depend  upon  the  accident  of 
property  or  taxation  seems  to  me  to  be  inconsistent  with  the  "  natural, 
essential,  and  inalienable  rights  of  man."  '  '  If  the  right  of  self-govern- 
ment, the  right  of  suffrage  be  a  natural  one,  belonging  to  every 
rational  being,  there  can  be  no  just  cause  for  depriving  any  citizen  of 
it,  except  perhaps  as  a  punishment  for  crime.' — Here  is  the  doctrine 
plainly  avowed,  of  universal  suffrage,  to  be  exercised  upon  the  highest 
occasions,  by  every  vagrant  and  vagabond  in  the  State,  not  in  a  condi- 
tion of  absolute  lunacy, — no  matter  how  idle  or  profligate  he  may  be. 
The  lowest  receptacles  of  vice  are  to  be  ransacked  by  party  zeal  to 
drag  from  their  obscixrity,  that  they  may  exercise  the  highest  rights  of 
man,  creatures  who  have  just  enough  of  humanity  left  to  be  recognized 
as  *  rational  beings.'  Town  paupers  are  to  be  marched  to  the  polls 
under  their  keepers,  and  it  is  even  left  hypothetical  by  your  Excel- 
lency, whether  convicted  criminals  should  not  be  released  from  con- 
finement, that  they  may  assist  by  their  votes  in  repealing  the  laws  for 
the  violation  of  which  they  have  forfeited  all  other  rights  of  citizens. 

For  the  virtuous  and  unfortunate  poor,  we  feel  as  much  respect  and 
compassion  as  your  Excellency  expresses;  but  for  those  who  are  too  idle 
and  vicious  to  contribute  even  the  value  of  a  day's  labor  to  qualify 
them  for  the  high  privileges  of  an  elector,  we  cannot  join  in  your  Ex- 
cellency's sympathy.  Were  it  possible  to  distinguish  between  the  two 
classes  by  law,  there  would  be  no  question,  but  that  the  former  might 
safely  be  permitted  to  vote  ;  though  without  any  thing  at  stake  in  the 
-well-being  of  society,  but  their  security  from  personal  injury.  But 
that  those  whom  the  widest  pliilanthropy  can  consider  only  as  burdens 
upon  the  community — injurious  to  its  morals  as  well  as  to  its  prosperity — 


28 

should  possess  the  same  right  with  the  industrious  poor,  is  absurd  in 
theory,  and  a  gross  injustice  to  those  who  feel  and  discharge  the  mu- 
tual obligations  which  alone  can  preserve  man  in  a  state  of  civilized 
society.  We  feel  well  assured  that  the  people  of  Massachusetts  will 
not  recognize  this  breaking  down  of  all  distinction  between  the  virtu- 
ous and  the  vicious,  between  the  industrious  frugal  citizen  and  the 
mere  vagrant,  as  one  of  the  elements  of  the  '  democratic  principle.' 
We  do  not  believe  that  empty  declamations  about  equal  rights,  have 
yet  so  far  deluded  them,  that  they  are  willing  to  be  classed  with  the 
most  degraded  of  their  species,  to  carry  out  such  a  theory  of  absolute 
equality. — We  hold  with  your  Excellency  and  with  the  Constitution, 
that  '  all  men  are  born  free  and  equal,'  but  we  understand,  as  our 
Fathers  did,  who  framed  that  Constitution,  that  men  may  fall  from 
that  high  equality,  and  forfeit  natural  rights  by  their  own  misconduct. 
We  agree  that  all  men  enter  the  world  with  equal  rights,  though  not 
with  equal  potoers,  and  that  one  of  those  rights  is,  to  be  admitted  to  a 
share  in  the  government  of  society  by  contributing  to  its  wants. 

Political  rights  and  duties  are  reciprocal  ;  and  when  the  last  are 
neglected,  it  is  just  that  the  first  should  be  forfeited.  The  Constitu- 
tion has  established  as  a  test  of  the  citizen's  willingness  to  perform  his 
civil  duties,  that  he  shall  pay  the  lowest  tax  that  can  be  assessed  upon 
any  one — that  he  shall  do  some  little  for  the  support  of  the  com- 
mon burden — that  if  he  cannot  or  will  not  accumulate  any  property 
liable  to  taxation,  he  shall  at  least  give  to  the  community  the  value  of 
one  day's  labor,  which,  in  our  country,  every  man  can  earn  at  pleasure, 
unless  he  is  disabled  by  infirmity.  To  require  this  as  the  condition 
upon  which  all  political  rights,  beyond  that  of  personal  protection, 
which  is  equally  extended  to  all  without  exception,  rights  even  over  the 
property  and  persons  of  others,  should  be  claimed,  appears  not  only 
reasonable,  but  extremely  liberal.  Beyond  this  line  it  seems  to  us,  lies 
not  liberty,  but  licentiousness — not  democracy,  but  absolute  anarchy. 

That  the  '  right  of  suffrage '  is  a  '  natural  one,  belonging  to  every 
rational  being,'  seems  to  us  a  singular  proposition.  In  a  state  of 
nature  no  such  right  could  be  exercised.  Election — representation 
— and  suffrage,  are  the  creatures  and  contrivances  of  society.  The 
natural  right  of  man  is  to  be  governed  by  himself  alone ;  but  this 
natural  right  is  to  be  abandoned  the  moment  he  enters  into  a  state  of 
civilized  society.  It  is  a  part  of  the  contract  by  which  he  receives 
protection  from  the  majority,  that  he  shall  yield  to  the  majority  this 
natural  right  of  individual  self-government :  this  is  the  very  founda- 
tion of  the  '  social  compact.'  Your  Excellency,  therefore,  in  using 
the  '  right  of  self-government,'  and  the  '  right  of  suffrage,'  as  synony- 
mous terms,  confounds  things  essentially  different.  We  should  be  glad 
to  believe,  that  to  this  confusion  of  ideas,  rather  than  to  any  design  to 


29 

overturn  the  defences  of  civilized  society,  and  to  abolish  all  law  but 
that  of  the  strongest,  this  portion  of  your  Excellency's  Address  is  to 
be  traced. 

Equally  unnecessary  and  uncalled  for,  appears  to  us  your  Excel- 
lency's remark,  that  '  further  provision  seems  to  be  needed  to  protect 
the  laboring  classes  and  poorer  portion  of  the  community  from  unjust 
and  oppressive  influences,  and  to  secure  to  them  more  perfect  inde- 
pendence and  freedom  of  political  action.'  The  fear  which  your  Ex- 
cellency speaks  of,  '  that  men  of  wealth  and  extensive  business '  inter- 
fere with  and  control  '  the  suffrages  of  those  dependent  upon  them  for 
employment,'  appears  to  us  destitute  of  any  rational  foundation,  if  it 
really  exists  in  the  mind  of  any  one.  But  if  such  a  practice  has  hap- 
pened to  fall  within  your  Excellency's  peculiar  sphere  of  observation, 
though  it  has  escaped  our  own  means  of  knowledge,  we  rejoice  that  it 
has  received  a  rebuke  from  a  quarter  that  will  command  the  respect  of 
the  delinquents. 

It  is  necessary,  however,  to  proceed  with  caution  in  drawing  our 
inferences  on  this  subject.  It  by  no  means  follows,  that  because 
employers  and  employed  act  together  on  political  subjects,  that  an 
oppressive  or  corrupt  influence  has  been  exerted.  There  is  no 
distinction  in  their  interests  properly  understood.  What  then  should 
lead  to  difference  of  action  at  the  polls  ?  When  the  honest  laborer  is 
found  voting  with  his  employer,  it  would  argue  m.ore  respect  for  him, 
and  would  be  more  consonant  with  a  spirit  of  fairness  to  believe,  that 
he  does  so  from  his  own  honest  conviction,  rather  than  because  he  has 
suffered  himself  to  be  bribed  or  coerced.  It  would  better  become  us 
to  suppose,  that  he  does  so,  because  he  has  the  intelligence  to  per- 
ceive that  the  interests  of  all  classes  are  in  harmony,  and  has  the  virtue 
to  resist  the  suggestions  of  artful  demagogues,  who  would  persuade 
him  that  there  is  a  natural  hostility  between  the  rich  and  the  poor. 

There  is  however  one  example  of  this  evil,  of  notorious  existence, 
and  of  the  first  magnitude,  which  your  Excellency  has  left  untouched; 
it  is  that  of  a  corrupt  and  unwarrantable  interference  with  the  elective 
franchise  on  the  part  of  the  officers  of  the  General  Government.  It  is 
perhaps  familiar  to  your  Excellency,  that  this  interference  has  here- 
tofore assumed  the  character  of  absolute  domination  in  the  Custom 
House  over  its  dependants  ;  and  probably  has  existed  in  other  offices 
of  the  General  Government.  Not  only  was  it  required  of  the  incum- 
bent to  vote  according  to  the  dictation  of  the  presiding  Officer,  but 
every  subordinate's  salary  was  forced  to  contribute  money  to  carry 
forward  the  purposes  of  the  party.  This  evil  has  attracted  attention 
in  Congress,  and  a  bill  to  provide  a  remedy  was  brought  forward  in 
the  Senate  of  the  United  States.  The  strongest  argument  then  used 
against  it  was,  that   the  State  Governments  are  competent  for  the 


30 

protection  of  their  Citizens  against  such  abuses.  Perhaps  the  evil 
may  recently  have  diminished  in  magnitude,  but  it  still  exists  in  a  very 
great  degree.  And  while  your  Excellency  was  upon  the  subject,  it  is 
a  matter  of  some  surprise,  that  this  very  striking,  if  not  the  only 
example  of  it  within  our  Commonwealth,  should  have  escaped  notice, 
or  not  been  deemed  to  require  a  remedy. 

■  There  are  other  topics  in  the  Address,  on  which  we  would  remark 
at  large,  but  that  this  Answer  has  extended  already  to  so  great  a  length. 
The  Address  is  pregnant  with  appeals  to  the  apprehensions  of  the 
citizens.  The  '  secrecy  of  the  ballot '  is  represented  as  insufficiently 
secured.  But  if  the  heavy  penalties  already  provided  by  law  for  any 
attempt  to  examine  the  ballot  of  a  voter,  and  his  acknowledged  power 
of  placing  it  in  the  ballot  box  so  as  only  to  be  read  in  open  violation 
of  that  law,  are  not,  as  now  first  intimated,  a  sufficient  protection 
against  this  danger,  it  is  again  to  be  regretted  that  some  better  remedy 
had  not  been  suggested  by  your  Excellency.  We  are  aware  that  it  is 
not  the  province  of  the  Executive,  in  general,  to  propose  the  details  of 
laws  ;  but  when  evils  unknown  to  the  rest  of  the  community  are  thus 
darkly  intimated  from  the  Chair  of  State,  the  suggestion  can  only  be 
made  useful  by  showing  how  those  evils  may  be  prevented. 

In  your  Excellency's  remarks  on  the  '  fundamental  defect  in  the 
frame  of  Government '  in  relation  to  the  basis  of  the  Senate,  and  on 
the  '  strong  objections  to  the  constitution  of  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives,' we  do  not  perceive  any  novelty  which  calls  for  further  reply, 
than  to  say  that  both  those  supposed  defects  had  been  already  provided 
for,  by  an  amendment  of  the  Constitution  passed  by  both  branches  of 
the  last  and  since  the  delivery  of  your  Excellency's  Address,  by 
the  present  Legislature. 

But  the  Majority  have  read  one  paragraph  of  your  Excellency's 
Address  on  this  subject,  with  sentiments  .which  a  just  regard  to  the 
dignity  and  rights  of  the  Legislature  will  not  permit  them  to  pass 
without  special  remark.  Your  Excellency  states,  that  in  proposing 
amendments  of  the  Constitution,  '  the  members  of  the  Legislature  act 
as  the  agents  of  the  people;'  to  this  we  assent,  and  we  quote  the 
language  only  that  there  may  be  no  mistake  as  to  the  persons  intended 
by  your  Excellency  as  '  the  agents,'  in  the  following  quotation  : — 

'  To  connect  two  amendments  so  that  they  cannot  be  voted  upon 
separately,  limits  the  citizen's  freedom  of  action,  indicates  an  attempt 
by  the  agents  to  impose  restraints  upon  their  principals,  and  manifests 
a  want  of  confidence  in  the  people.' 

We  understand,  necessarily,  that  your  Excellency  refers  in  this  to  the 
proposed  amendment  of  the  Constitution  which  unites  a  change  in  the 
basis  of  the  Senate,  with  a  new  ratio  of  representation  in  the  House. 
This  amendment  was  adopted  by  the  last  Legislature  by  a  vote  of  279 


31 

to  42,  in  the  House,  and  by  a  vote  of  22  to  9  in  the  Senate,  and  has 
passed  both  Houses  of  the  present  Legislature,  by  very  large  majorities, 
— When  your  Excellency  delivered  the  Address,  this  was  a  matter 
pending  before  the  Legislature.  In  such  a  case,  any  interference  on 
the  part  of  the  Executive,  is  holden  to  be  a  high  breach  of  privilege. 
The  Parliament  of  England  will  not  suffer  it  from  the  Crown,  and  we 
trust  that  the  right  of  the  Legislature,  under  a  popular  government,  is 
not  less  clear,  to  protect  itself  from  Executive  interference.  But  with- 
out insisting  upon  this  established  right  in  every  case,  we  are  com- 
pelled to  say,  that  in  the  present  instance  your  Excellency's  language 
sounds  equally  strange  and  offensive  in  our  ears,  as  coming  from 
a  Governor  of  Massachusetts  to  the  Representatives  of  the  People, 
To  say  to  the  Legislature,  at  any  time,  that  they  are  attempting  to 
limit  the  citizen's  freedom  of  action,  and  to  impose  restraints  upon 
their  principals,  and  that  they  are  manifesting  a  want  of  confidence  in 
the  people,  is  little  short  of  a  deliberate  insult.  But  this  attempt  of 
your  Excellency  to  dictate  to  the  Legislature,  assumes  a  remarkable 
character,  when  it  is  considered  that  not  only  was  the  measure  then 
pending  before  them,  but  that  it  was  one  in  which  your  Excellency  is 
not  authorised  in  any  event  to  interfere.  The  power  of  proposing 
amendments  to  the  Constitution  is  vested  by  that  instrument  in  the 
Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  alone.  It  is  a  subject  upon 
which  the  Governor  can  never  be  called  on  to  revise  the  result  of  their 
deliberations  :  the  Constitution  has  made  it  the  business  of  the  Legis- 
lature, and  not  that  of  your  Excellency. 

'  Agents '  we  undoubtedly  are,  though  your  Excellency  uses  the 
word  with  less  of  courtesy  than  is  usual  on  such  occasions.  But  while 
we  acknowledge  our  allegiance  and  accountability  to  our  '  principals,' 
we  hold  ourselves  in  no  manner  responsible  to  your  Excellency — who 
is  but  another  'Agent,'  and  for  a  different  purpose — for  the  discharge 
of  our  duties  :  and  to  be  thus  admonished  how  we  shall  perform  them, 
in  a  matter  actually  pending  before  us,  your  Excellency  must  hold  us 
justified  in  saying,  is  not  to  be  endured  by  the  Representatives  of  a 
free  People, 

Your  Excellency's  own  party  have  presumed  in  this  matter  to  think 
and  act  for  themselves,  and  have  voted  for  the  amendment  without  any 
attempt  to  enforce  your  Excellency's  dictation  to  divide  its  two  pro- 
visions. If  the  Majority  of  the  Legislature  had  entertained  the  least 
apprehension  that  this  interference  with  the  Constitutional  powers  of 
the  Legislature  would  produce  any  effect  upon  the  vote,  they  would 
have  felt  it  their  duty  immediately  to  move  an  inquiry,  which  would 
have  given  your  Excellency  an  opportunity  of  disclaiming  the  disre- 
spectfiil  intention  manifested  by  this  language ;  but  as  it  gave  them  no 
uneasiness  to  hear  so  powerless  an  attempt  to  restrain  the  freedom  of 


32 

action  by  the  Legislature  upon  one  of  their  highest  duties,  so  it  would 
have  given  them  no  pleasure  to  place  your  Excellency  in  the  disagree- 
able predicament  of  disavowing  its  obvious  meaning. 

Having  thus  noticed  the  principal  subjects  of  your  Excellency's 
Address,  we  cannot  close  this  Answer  without  adverting  to  its  remark- 
able omissions.  Long,  elaborate  and  diffusive — it  covers  all  the  topics 
of  Party — but  it  forgets  the  great  interests  of  the  State.  Not  a  word 
could  be  found  in  it  to  be  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Agriculture — 
not  a  word  to  be  referred  to  that  on  the  Fisheries.  It  would  seem  to 
have  been  forgotten  by  your  Excellency,  in  your  haste  to  take  up  the  de- 
fence of  the  new  'Democratic  principle'  in  all  its  popular  phases,  that  a 
farm,  or  a  farmer,  exists  in  Massachusetts.  And  the  Fisheries,  so  vital 
an  interest  to  the  State,  and  endangered  as  that  interest  is  by  propo- 
sitions now  pending  before  Congress,  seem  equally  to  have  escaped 
your  Excellency's  recollection. 

Our  Public  Lands  are  not  mentioned  by  your  Excellency  ;  neither 
those  in  the  East,  which  are  threatened  by  the  claims  of  the  British 
Government ;  nor  those  vast  territories  in  the  West,  to  which  our 
unquestionable  rights,  as  tenants  in  common  with  the  other  States, 
are  proposed  by  your  Excellency's  friends  at  Washington,  to  be  ceded 
without  consideration  to  the  States  in  which  they  happen  to  lie. 

The  Massachusetts  Claim  too,  so  prominent  a  topic  in  former 
Executive  Addresses,  on  which  the  people  feel  so  sensitively,  and  of 
which  the  payment,  long  and  unjustly  delayed,  would  come  so  oppor- 
tunely now,  to  relieve  our  present  embarrassments,  is  quite  forgotten 
by  your  Excellency,  in  the  anticipated  glories  of  the  Independent 
Treasury. 

The  Executive  Address  reminds  us  throughout,  we  say  it  with  a 
sorrowful  sincerity,  that  for  the  first  time  for  many  years  past,  we 
have  a  Chief  Magistrate,  who  feels  himself  more  the  head  of  a  Party, 
than  the  head  of  the  State. 

In  conclusion,  we  regret  that  a  document  should  go  forth  to  the 
people  of  this  country,  and  to  the  world,  with  the  imposing  authority 
of  an  official  Address  from  the  Governor  of  Massachusetts,  in  which 
such  a  general  and  comprehensive  dissatisfaction  is  proclaimed  with 
the  state  of  things  here  existing.  Our  venerable  Commonwealth  has 
generally  been  regarded  as  exhibiting  one  of  the  most  perfect  examples 
of  a  well  constituted  and  well  governed  Republic.  Your  Excellency, 
after  having  been  long  honored  with  an  eminent  station  in  its  magistracy, 
now  succeeds  to  its  highest  official  trust,  with  an  Inaugural  Address, 
which  speaks  of  little  in  its  institutions  with  approbation,  and  con- 
demns many  of  their  most  important  features.  What  will  be  thought 
by  the  friends  of  liberty  in  other  nations,  who  are  struggling  for  the 
reform  of  real  abuses,  when  they  shall  see  from  its  Chief  Magistrate, 


33  y 

an  Address  that  finds  nothing  as  it  should  be  in  a  State  like 
Massachusetts  1 

Your  Excellency  finds  the  Constitution,  by  its  imperfect  security 
of  the  right  of  suffrage,  to  leave  a  large  portion  of  its  citizens  in 
•state  of  political  servitude.'  Your  Excellency  finds  'the  secrecy 
of  ballot '  to  be  '  frequently  infringed,'  that  its  '  peculiar  province 
is  not  sufficiently  understood  or  regarded,'  and  '  that  men  of  wealth 
and  extensive  business,'  '  infringe  the  right  of  choice '  and  '  con- 
trol the  suff"rages  of  those  who  may  be  dependent  upon  them  for 
employment.'  Your  Excellency  declares  that  in  our  legislation,  a 
'small  proportion  of  our  labor  is  given  to  the  public,'  and  'much  to 
individuals' — that  a  large  portion  of  it  has  been  devoted  to  the  pro- 
motion of  '  monopolies '  and  private  speculations — that  our  systems  of 
currency  are  'unjust  and  unequal'  in  their  action — that  the  '  habits' 
of  our  people  are  those  of  'individual  extravagance,  which  wastefully 
consume  the  common  stock,  while  they  produce  private  profligacy 
and  wretchedness.  Your  Excellency  '  mentions  with  sorrow '  that 
'our  ancient  and  venerated  Commonwealth'  has  incurred  heavy 
responsibilities  for  the  construction  of  works  of  internal  improve- 
ment, which  'impose  unequal  and  unjust  burdens.'  Your  Excellency 
declares  that  the  disorder  of  our  finances  is  'an  extraordinary  spectacle' 
— and  strongly  intimates  that  extravagant  compensations  are  paid  to 
'supernumerary  officers,'  and  for  '  agencies  and  commissions,'  not  for 
the  public  good,  but  for  'vain  show  or  ostentatious  display,'  'on 
account  of  family  or  friends,'  or  '  for  political  services  or  partisan 
efforts.'  Your  Excellency,  in  proposing  a  change  in  the  Judicial 
system,  finds  existing  a  '  delay  and  expense  of  litigation,  which  now, 
to  poorer  parties,  amounts  to  a  denial  of  justice.'  Your  Excellency 
finds,  with  'deep  regret  and  mortification,'  that  the  'state  and  or- 
ganization of  our  militia  are  so  imperfect,'  that  'for  some  time  its 
progress  has  been  that  of  deterioration  instead  of  improvement.'  Your 
Excellency  finds  our  'common  schools'  exposed  'to  fall  into  neglect 
and  disrepute.'  Your  Excellency  apprehends  that  entails  and  the 
right  of  primogeniture  will  be  reestablished,  and  finds  '  factitious 
distinctions  in  society,'  'from  education,  from  family,  from  social 
relations,  and  from  wealth,  are  multiplying  and  becoming  more  clearly 
defined  and  regarded.'  And  finally,  your  Excellency  finds  the  Sena- 
tors and  Representatives  of  the  State,  regardless  of  duty  in  the  ex- 
ercise of  the  highest  powers  committed  to  them,  attempting  to  '  limit 
the  citizen's  freedom  of  action,  to  impose  restraints  upon  their  prin- 
cipals, and  manifesting  a  want  of  confidence  in  the  people.' 

That  such  an  exposition  of  the  condition  of  our  beloved  Common- 
wealth should  have  been  proclaimed  from  its  Chair  of  State,  must  be  a 
source  of  deep  mortification  and  regret  to  all.  But  there  is  consola- 
5 


^  34 

tion  in  the  reflection,  that  the  very  length  of  this  catalogue  of  evils 
will  prevent  its  being  received  without  large  allowance  for  the  fact, 
that  it  is  the  judgment  of  one  just  elevated  to  office  upon  the  admin- 
istration of  a  long  successful  competitor.  Discouraging  as  it  may 
appear  to  the  friends  of  republican  institutions  elsewhere,  we  are  in 
no  wise  alarmed  by  a  list  of  grievances  of  which  so  many  are  purely 
imaginary.  On  the  other  hand,  we  see  in  our  political  condition  some 
evils  and  dangers  which  your  Excellency's  Address  seems  only  adapted 
to  foment  and  aggravate,  and  which  we  shall  feel  it  our  duty  to 
endeavor  to  correct  and  avert ;  and  more  especially  shall  we  consider 
it  among  the  first  of  our  obligations  to  our  country,  to  restore  the 
Government  of  Massachusetts  to  the  guidance  of  correct  political 
principles  in  the  Executive  Department. 


DANIEL  P.  KING. 
GEORGE  MOREY. 
JARED  WHITMAN. 
WILLIAM  J.  HUBBARD. 
DAVID  CHOATE. 
GEORGE  B.  UPTON. 
TIMOTHY  A.  PHELPS. 
JOHN  S.  WILLIAMS. 
AMOS  ABBOTT. 
SAMUEL  LANE. 
CHARLES  C.  P.  HASTINGS. 


JAMES  SAVAGE. 
SAMUEL  WOt)D. 
ISAAC  HARRIS. 
WILLIAM  BOWDOIN. 
SETH  SPRAGUE,  Jr. 
GEORGE  T.  DAVIS. 
CHARLES  MAUSTON. 
JOSIAH  QUINCY,  Ja. 
SIDNEY  WILLARD*^ 
JOSIAH  LITTLE. 


FRANKLIN  DEXTER. 
KATHAN  DURFEE. 
ELII'HALET  WILLIAMS. 
J.  E.  HOWARD. 
JOHN  GARDNER. 
NAHUM  MITCHELL. 
GEORGE  T.  CURTIS. 
FRANCIS  BROWN. 
JO.SEPH  LEWIS. 
JAMES  W.  GATES. 
ALLEN  PUTNAM. 
SILVANUS  CROWELL. 
WILLIAM  CLAP. 
SILAS  JONES. 

GEORGE  TYLER  BIGELOW. 
CALEB  WHEELER. 
ELI  B.  LAMSON. 
CHARLES  HILLS. 
CJZIAS  GOODWIN. 
HORACE  HANDERSON. 
SPENCER  MOODY. 
HOSWELL  ALLEN. 
MARTIN  HAGER. 
JOSEPH  PARK. 
JOHN  B.  READ. 
BENJAMIN  ALDEN. 
CYRUS  ALDEN. 


EDWARD  T.  NASH, 
SAMUEL  H.  W ALLEY,  Jr. 
JOHN  EDDY. 
JESSE  WINSLOW. 
EZEKIEL  HAYDEN. 
GAD  O.  BLISS. 
CHARLES  P.  PHELPS. 
GEORGE  BRADBURN. 
CHARLES  HALE. 
PEREZ  MASON. 
CYRUS  FAULKNER. 
ENOCH  FRENCH. 
MINOTT  THAYER. 
WILLARD  PIERCE. 
FREEMAN  ATKINS. 
THEODORE  JONES, 
CYRUS  DAVIS. 
CHARLES  ALLEN, 
ALFRED  KITTREDGE. 
JOHN  THURSTON. 
MOSES  LELAND. 
CHARLES  ADAM.S. 
FRANCIS  A.  FABENS. 
JAMES  BENTON. 
GEORGE  W.  CARR. 
STEPHEN  P.  WEBB. 
J.  GILES. 


35 


JONATHAN  CROWELL. 

ROBERT  STUART. 

ZACCHEUS  PARKER. 

JAMES  C.  STARKWEATHER. 

JAMES  M.  WHITON. 

LUKE  FISKE. 

THOMAS  LORING. 

SAMUEL  GREELE. 

SAMUEL  QUINCY. 

S.  HAYNES  JENKS. 

ISAAC  SOUTHGATE. 

WILLIAM  LAWRENCE. 

HENRY  POOR. 

THOMAS  A.  DAVIS. 

Wn.LlAM  LINCOLN. 

SETH  CROWELL. 

E.  L).  WHITAKER. 

ROBERT  HOOPER,  Jr. 

PHINEHAS  HARMON. 

FREEMAN  TAYLOR. 

THOMAS  A.  GREENE. 

J.  THOMAS  STEVENSON. 
CHARLES  W.  PALFRAY. 
J.  P.  HEALY. 
E.  J.  BISPHAM. 
JAMES  H.  CLAPP. 
JOSIAH  B.-XCON. 
ANDREW  DODGE. 
ADDISON  BROWN. 
COMFORT  B.  PL  ATT. 
SAMUEL  ROGERS. 
STEPHEN  SALISBURY. 
JUSTIN  WAIT. 
J.  C.  BRIGGS. 
LEONARD  CHURCH. 
S.  P.  FOWLER. 
WILLIAM  GOSS. 
RICHARD  BAKER,  Jr. 
WILLIAM  LAMSON. 
CYRUS  WEEKS. 
JABEZ  PECK. 
LORENZO  RICE. 
DAVID  FEARLfNG. 
EI.IIIU  HOBART. 
JOHN   HOWDOIN. 
CALVIN  STRONG. 
JOSEPH  BARROWS. 
THOMAS  SAVERY. 
DAVIS  THAYER. 
ALPHEUS  CLARK. 
WARD  ADAMS. 
SAMUEL  SIURTEVANT,  Jr. 
ELI  BRADLEY. 
J.  F.  WADS  WORTH. 
JAMES  HARRIS. 
SILAS  FLA(iG. 
LABAN  CUSHING. 


JONATHAN  BLISS, 

TILLA  CHAFFIN. 

WILLIAM  HINSDALE. 

WILLIAM  EARNED. 

T.  R.  MARVIN. 

E.  SWIFT. 

JOSEPH  TRIPP. 

ROBERT  GOULD. 

HENRY  GRANT. 

CRANSTON  HOWE. 

JOSEPH  W.  REVERE. 

HENRY  M.  BROWN. 

DANIEL  NOYES. 

MOSES  HOYT,  Jr. 

H.  M.  WILLIS. 

E.  D.  HAMILTON. 

EBENEZER  MATTOON,  Je. 

I.  P.  DAVIS. 

SNELL  BABBITT. 

SEWALL  MIRICK. 

JOSIAH  FOSTER. 

LEWIS  G.  PRAY. 

BENSON  LEAVITT. 

J.  A.  SHAW. 

JOHN  I.  BAKER. 

THOMAS  B.  WALES. 

'JHEOPHILUS  PARSONS. 

GEORGE  H.  SMITH, 

BENJAMIN  GARDNER. 

FREDERIC  EMERSON. 

SILAS  STETSON. 

JOHN  BOLES. 

ROBERT  CHARLES  WINTHROP. 

WILLIAM  W.  PARROTT. 

WILLIAM  JAMES. 

WILLIAM  HARRIS. 

JOSHUA  FALLS. 

OLIVER  SMITH. 

DAVID  PULSIFER,  Jr. 

E.  W,  LEACH. 

ALLEN  W.  DODGE, 

GEORGE  WILLIAM  PHILLIPS,,^»«^ 

NATHAN  GURNEY. 

JOHN  C.  GRAY. 

NICHOLAS  TOWER. 

THOMAS  HUNTING. 

WILLIAM  WILLETT. 

AMOS  BINNEY. 

DANIEL  SAFFORD. 

DAVID  FRANCIS. 

THOMAS  PATTEN, 

GEORGE  DARRACOTT, 

JOHN  RAYNER, 

ICHABOD  POPE, 

NOAH  BROOKS, 

JOHN   SHIPMAN. 

SAMUEL  W,  HALL. 


n 


36 


JAMES  FRANCIS. 
FREDERICK  GOULD. 
WOODBRIDGE  STRONG. 
FRANCIS  J.  OLIVER. 
WILLIAM  B.  MITCHELL. 
SAMUEL  JOHNSON. 
CHARLES  V.  CARD. 
TAMERLANE  BURT. 
CARLOS  BARROWS. 
BENJAMIN  BOURNE. 
WILLIAM  CLARK,  Jr. 
ASAHEL  BILLINGS. 
PHILIP  BARNES. 
ELI  MOODY. 
JOHN  LUDDEN. 
NELSON  PALMER. 
JARED  BARTLETT. 
JOSEPH  ORCUTT. 
STEPHEN  GLOYD. 
JOHN  GREEN,  Jr. 
JOHN  B.  WELL.S. 
JEFFREY  RICHARDSON. 
ELIAB  WHITMAN. 
JOSIAH  VINTON,  Jr. 
J.  W.  ROGERS. 
WILLIAM  D.  WATERS. 
LUTHER  SNOW. 
DANIEL  DENNY. 
BARNABAS  FREEMAN. 
ELIPHALET  P.  HARTSHORN. 
ROBERT  KEITH. 
JOSEPH  B.  MORSS. 
DAVID  COOK. 
JESSE  PERKINS. 
THOMAS  B.  SMITH. 
JEFFERSON  BANCROFT. 
ISAAC  SCRIPTURE. 
SAMUEL  W.  CARTER. 
ALVAH  MANSUR. 
HIRAM  NEWTON. 
JONATHAN  B.  BANCROFT. 
PENUEL   PARKER. 
WALTER  BAKER. 
ALFRED  GIBBS. 
NA  THANIEL  WRIGHT; 
JOSEPH  A.  MOORE. 
FREEMAN  WALKER. 


H.  B.  WHEELER. 
ROYAL  SOUTH  WICK. 
CALVIN  COOLEY. 
FRIEND  KNOWLTON. 
LATHROP  CLARK. 
JOHN  ATKINS. 
BENJAMIN  FRY. 
MOSES  KIMBALL. 
SILAS  THURSTON,  Jr. 
JOEL  BARTLETT. 
CHARLES  W.  MORGAN. 
JOHN  PERKINS. 
JOHN  F.  EMERSON. 
JOHN  EDDY. 
JAMES  RICHARDSON. 
NATHAN  HEARD. 
CHAKLES  ELLIS. 
S.  WILLIAMS^^ 
PLINY  WETHERBEE. 
JESSE  PHELPS. 
J.  H.  WARD. 
NAHUM  STETSON. 
NAHUM  FISHER. 
OTIS  BRIGHA.M. 
SILAS  WALKER. 
BENJAMIN  F.'KEYES. 
GEORGE  PEaBODY.  * 
ELIJAH  WARREN. 
SAMUEL  T.  SAWYER. 
DAVID  JOY. 
CALVIN  ROCKWOOD. 
LEWIS  CHAPIN. 
FRANCIS  DEANE,  Jr. 
NAHUM  W.  HOLBROOK. 
ELEAZER  B.  DRAPER. 
FRANCIS  PERKINS. 
P.  D.  WHITMORE. 
STEPHEN  FAY. 
EBENEZER  STETSON. 
E.  P.  THAYER. 
JOSEPH  CLEVERLY^ 
JOHN  WRIGHT. 
CHARLES  NYE. 
JOSIAH  HOLMES. 
EMORY  GREEN  LEAF. 
RUFUS  KENDALL. 


State  House,  Boston,  March  14,  1840. 


^ 


I 


THE  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Santa  Barbara 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW. 


Series  9482 


Ilillillllllllllllllllllliillillllll 

3  1205  02528  5212 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILIT/ 


AA    000  877  052    1 


